# yet another label prototype



## SeattleMartin (Apr 22, 2019)

*preface:* very rough pototype for a label. i repeat, very rough prototype. so... i hope to eventually sell my soaps publicly. (possibly this summer? i know, trust me i know, that it may be too early.) in the meantime i am working on labels so that when i give and 'sell' soaps to friends and family i have something on them that will be representative of (similar enough to) a finished and final label when we go public.
(pics at the bottom of the post)

moving on.
i've been working on label ideas for awhile and would like to solicit some feedback. i'm not entirely happy with this design, but i'm trying to stay simple. i'm not new to design work or labels, but this is a first for me in the sense that i am creating labels for myself and my own products. the labels will represent myself, my partners and the company overall. it makes me nervous  i have done SO much reading on the subject, made many prototype labels before this one, checked and double checked regulations, checked again, checked some more, fretted and worried, etc etc etc (i second guess myself constantly on almost everything, and am very much my own worst critic.)

which brings me to questions.
1) as a former designer, i recall InDesign from Adobe being a fairly superb tool for desktop publishing. i am prototyping in Photoshop, but am considering going back to a more full package for the sake of other tools such as video editing and desktop publishing. is InDesign still pretty much a pimp? any other thoughts on Adobe products currently?
2) previous labels included ingredients but it felt to be a bit much work when also listing the ingredients with the online listing (private facebook group for now. website in the works. the final label would include a domain name for people to reach the website to get ingredients and more info in general. and yes, i have actually purchased two domain names already and they are parked... but that is a whole separate discussion for a whole separate thread.) but i know that people really want to know what's in the soap, BUT people also tend to discard wrappers pretty quickly anyways so.... thoughts?
3) While it seems a little ... "icky" to say things like natural and organic on the label at all, i realize that this is actually very important to many people these days. the bit of feedback from friends and family suggests this should definitely be on the label but i just don't know how i feel about it yet. i know that i prefer natural and organic ingredients as much as possible but there are also rules about all that. thoughts or advice?

many many thanks for all the help you all offer so regularly. i know it can be difficult to take time out for these things, but i really do appreciate it and know that many other do too. i hope to offer more information over the years to come and to never stop asking questions. learning is so cool 

much love,
martin


----------



## earlene (Apr 22, 2019)

If you want your labels to be sale ready earlier rather than later, here are some things you need to change in order to meet the US FDA & FTC labeling requirements:

Net weight (not approx. weight)
Ingredients list (optional if not a cosmetic, but see links below)
Business/Responsible party address  (see links below)

https://www.mariegale.com/quick-labeling-faq/
https://www.ftc.gov/enforcement/rul...eform-proceedings/fair-packaging-labeling-act


----------



## Misschief (Apr 22, 2019)

If you're familiar with InDesign, you might want to check out Page Plus. It has a lot of the same features as ID but, at $27.99, it's a much better deal. It is a legacy product with no further customer support but the price is right and it's a pretty powerful program. I use it at home and I have it on my work computer as well I work in a print shop; the designers use ID but I really don't need it as I'm in sales. Every now and then, though, I'm called upon to put something together for a customer and Page Plus works just great.


----------



## Relle (Apr 22, 2019)

I think you can leave off - we love you, we love our planet - earth.   We care about you.

That's not something you need on a label, stick to the basics.. Also saying we care about you, we love you - you are marketing to strangers, not someone you know, it's too personal to put that on a label. On that alone I wouldn't buy your product, no matter how good. 

Personally, I like to see who the product is made by, the weight, scent and ingredients( I like to know what's in a product before or if I buy) that's it. I'd leave off natural and organic.

The *& *on the front label I would change to *and*, because the *&* looks like little squiggles.


----------



## SeattleMartin (Apr 22, 2019)

Misschief said:


> If you're familiar with InDesign, you might want to check out Page Plus. It has a lot of the same features as ID but, at $27.99, it's a much better deal. It is a legacy product with no further customer support but the price is right and it's a pretty powerful program. I use it at home and I have it on my work computer as well I work in a print shop; the designers use ID but I really don't need it as I'm in sales. Every now and then, though, I'm called upon to put something together for a customer and Page Plus works just great.


Much appreicated, I will definitely look into it 



Relle said:


> I think you can leave off - we love you, we love our planet - earth.   We care about you.
> That's not something you need on a label, stick to the basics.. Also saying we care about you, we love you - you are marketing to strangers, not someone you know, it's too personal to put that on a label. On that alone I wouldn't buy your product, no matter how good.


Admittedly it sort of breaks my heart a little to hear that as part of my mission is to donate soaps and personal care products to local shelters, but I thank you for your honest opinion and feedback. 



> Personally, I like to see who the product is made by, the weight, scent and ingredients( I like to know what's in a product before or if I buy) that's it. I'd leave off natural and organic.
> The *& *on the front label I would change to *and*, because the *&* looks like little squiggles.


 Upon public release I expect to mostly sell online with a some sales in person at small local markets, etc. However, in consideration of the possibility for consignment and such, perhaps the ingredients should go back onto the label. Decisions, decisions. Again, I thank you very much for your honest feedback.


----------



## artemis (Apr 22, 2019)

SeattleMartin said:


> Upon public release I expect to mostly sell online with a some sales in person at small local markets, etc. However, in consideration of the possibility for consignment and such, perhaps the ingredients should go back onto the label. Decisions, decisions. Again, I thank you very much for your honest feedback.



I think it should be on the label whether you sell online or not. I'm not going to remember which  ingredients you listed on your website bafter I buy your soap. And, what if I give a bar away? The giftee may want to know what's in it.

Also, I like the ampersand.


----------



## SeattleMartin (Apr 22, 2019)

earlene said:


> If you want your labels to be sale ready earlier rather than later, here are some things you need to change in order to meet the US FDA & FTC labeling requirements:
> 
> Net weight (not approx. weight)
> Ingredients list (optional if not a cosmetic, but see links below)
> ...



Net weight... Approximate Net Weight? Do you have an exact source on that please? I ask because I am still feeling like I am struggling with this. According to this:  
https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrie...rue&n=pt16.1.500&r=PART&ty=HTML#se16.1.500_17


> *§500.9   Units of weight or mass, how expressed.*
> (a) The term net weight or net mass may be used in stating the net quantity of contents in terms of weight or mass. However, where the term “net weight” or “net mass” is not used, the quantity of contents shall always disclose the net quantity of contents.


I don't even need to use "net weight" but just simply state the weight? And it says "may use" rather than "must use" and I see nothing about using other forms of expression, especially in terms of approximation being either allowed or disallowed?
These are hand cut, hewn by my own self if you will. The weight varies a bit from bar to bar. So I suppose I could weigh every single bar and adjust label or product?
And in the end, I will likely be getting a multi-bar cutter to help ensure even weight across bars from a given batch. But even then, what if all but one weigh 4oz and one weighs 3.9?
Honestly I really would love to understand this better because I sincerely do not intend to mislead anyone and really do want to do this right.

It's a soap, not a cosmetic, and I believe I have avoided any such claims. Or maybe you see something on the label that I missed in that regard? Regardless I am still debating on listing ingredients online only or adding it back to the packaging. Decisions, ugh.

The address would be listed online in this case, but as you can see there is obviously city and zip for a minimum. At the 5:35 mark  https://www.soapguild.org/how-to/legal-compliance/how-to-properly-label-soap.php Granted, I am also considering the caveat she mentions.

In closing, thank you so very much for taking the time to give me your feedback. I still have so many things to think over. 



artemis said:


> I think it should be on the label whether you sell online or not. I'm not going to remember which  ingredients you listed on your website bafter I buy your soap. And, what if I give a bar away? The giftee may want to know what's in it.


I know... it's killin' me. LOL  I think I may just replace the whole back blurb with ingredients. (this is where i go vehemently curse the labeling process in private.)


----------



## DWinMadison (Apr 22, 2019)

#1, I love it.  IF I were to be critical because you asked, I’d knock down the font size on your weight...maybe go with something sans sherif .  Also, I’d knock your logo down just a hair so it doesn’t crowd “Everyday.”  Now, forget everything I said.  It’s perfect, and I know nothing.


----------



## SeattleMartin (Apr 22, 2019)

DWinMadison said:


> #1, I love it.  IF I were to be critical because you asked, I’d knock down the font size on your weight...maybe go with something sans sherif .  Also, I’d knock your logo down just a hair so it doesn’t crowd “Everyday.”  Now, forget everything I said.  It’s perfect, and I know nothing.


You're feedback is as invaluable as all others! Also, I tend to love your sense of humor.
I actually agree with making the logo a little smaller. I think I am going to remove some of the whitespace from inside the logo itsself as well. Tighten it up a bit.
I was playing with some sans serif typefaces actually but they felt a little difficult on the eye as compared to serif. Just me, of course, but it also seemed to validate a design guideline I was given many, many, many moons ago  
As for the weight, the typeface I chose for the logo was done due to it's inherent weight. I am thinking I may use Times New Roman for all the other serif print. I'm definitely not married to a script font as a soap title choice, but it seemed to work for this particular idea. I was thinking about maybe using different typefaces for different soap names? What do you think?
Thanks for being critical and feel free to apply as much critique as you like. 



artemis said:


> Also, I like the ampersand.


Thanks. I think I am going to drop it from the tagline but leave it in the logo.
p.s. I recognized that location of yours, but I couldn't quite put my thumb on the reference. I got mad at myself when I looked it up and realized it was the exact location I thought it was. But still, how could I have forgotten that it's from THE guide? I am so ashamed.


----------



## Lin19687 (Apr 23, 2019)

Net weight (not approx. weight)
As stated above and in other posts, also listed in the US rules


----------



## penelopejane (Apr 23, 2019)

I personally think the label is too busy.  There are also too many different fonts for me.  

Weigh 10 of your soaps (once you have settled on your mold and soap thickness) and get a minimum weight.  You can then put the lightest weight on your label. The weight of the soap after cure should not be less than the weight on the label but it can be more.

Might as well start off as you mean to continue with a legal, professional label. Keep on tweaking, you will get there.

I do not buy a soap unless it has a list of the ingredients on the wrapping.


----------



## dixiedragon (Apr 23, 2019)

I like it. The only part I might change is deleting the part where it says "artisan bath @  body". I really like the rest of the layout. Easy to read, all relevant info. Not a lot of junk. Looks like where it says "plain & mild" you might put your scent name?


----------



## earlene (Apr 23, 2019)

SeattleMartin said:


> Net weight... Approximate Net Weight? Do you have an exact source on that please? I ask because I am still feeling like I am struggling with this. According to this:
> https://www.ecfr.gov/cgi-bin/retrie...rue&n=pt16.1.500&r=PART&ty=HTML#se16.1.500_17
> 
> I don't even need to use "net weight" but just simply state the weight? And it says "may use" rather than "must use" and I see nothing about using other forms of expression, especially in terms of approximation being either allowed or disallowed?
> ...




The references were in my previous post, but it was extensive reading with additional links within those references.  

However, regarding the net weight part of the discussion, the FTC regulations clearly states: 
Quote:  
*§500.7   Net quantity of contents, method of expression.*
The net quantity of contents shall be expressed in terms of weight or mass, measure, numerical count, or a combination of numerical count and weight or mass, size, or measure so as to give accurate information regarding the net quantity of contents thereof, and thereby facilitate value comparisons by consumers. The net quantity of contents statement shall be in terms of fluid measure if the commodity is liquid, or in terms of weight or mass if the commodity is solid, semi-solid, or viscous, or a mixture of solid and liquid. If there is a firmly established general consumer usage and trade custom of declaring the contents of a liquid by weight or mass, or a solid, semi-solid, or viscous product by fluid measure, numerical count, and/or size, or (as in the case of lawn and plant care products) by cubic measure, it may be used, when such declaration provides sufficient information to facilitate value comparisons by consumers. The declaration may appear in more than one line of print or type.
End Quote.

Shall be is the same as must in federal regulation terminology.
So yes, you do need to include Net Weight for bar soap.  Just because it doesn't say you can't use the word approximate, you aren't supposed to use approximate.  It should be the net weight (or final weight) at the time of receipt by the consumer.  In reality, it can weigh more than the stated net weight, but not less than the stated net wt.  The reason behind that is fairly obvious: the consumer will likely feel they got a bargain if they got more than they paid for, but will feel cheated if they get less than they paid for.


Regarding if it should meet the labeling requirement for soap or a cosmetic or a drug:

Could be regulated as a drug or a cosmetic?  I can't say from that label, since you don't include ingredients.   You obviously are making no claims that it is a cosmetic or a drug, so that should be fine if you don't list ingredients.  But many people will not buy soap that doesn't list ingredients.  I won't, either.

If it is soap only and not a cosmetic or a drug (this depends on your claims about the soap AND people's common perceptions of certain ingredients AND anything you include on the label that would lead the customer to believe it would be cosmetic or a medicinal), then the rules about what you put on the label differs.

One example of how public perception can influence how a soap might fall into a cosmetic or drug category:  Historically,  pine tar is used medicinally and many people perceive pine tar soap as at the very least 'soothing', and often much more medicinal than that.  There is a long history of pine tar as a medicinal application for skin problems, therefore, if a soaper uses pine tar in their soap, they really should follow all the required labeling requirements for a drug, even if the soaper clearly states on the label that it is soap and only for cleaning.  Why?  Because the buyer is more likely than not, buying the soap for it's perceived medicinal application.  One can argue that it is not necessary if you state 'for cleaning only', but why not just follow the labeling requirements for a drug and rest easy?  It's not that hard to meet those requirements.

How can a soap be a cosmetic?  If it is stated on the label that it moisturizes, then it is regulated as a cosmetic and the appropriate labeling is required.   There are other examples, but I just wanted to list a one from each category.


----------



## MGM (Apr 23, 2019)

I like the "we love you"....it's quirky and memorable. Has anyone actually READ THE LABEL of Dr Bronner's soap? I swear it's that weirdness that keeps me buying the stuff....


----------



## dixiedragon (Apr 23, 2019)

MGM said:


> I like the "we love you"....it's quirky and memorable. Has anyone actually READ THE LABEL of Dr Bronner's soap? I swear it's that weirdness that keeps me buying the stuff....


I agree! I find it funny.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 23, 2019)

The ingredients have to be on the label.  I would also list the scent on the front and leave a space for a UPC code.


----------



## snappyllama (Apr 23, 2019)

If I didn't know anything about homemade soap, the line about "Seriously. Do not, for any reason, put this in someone's mouth" would make me think it was possibly dangerous/poisonous. I wouldn't buy it - especially if I had kids or pets at home. They stick everything in their mouths. 

I get that you are alluding to washing your mouth out with soap... maybe something like "Meant for washing your body, not your mouth"?


----------



## Steven (Apr 23, 2019)

I agree with a few of the comments above

1) The spacing of Everyday and the logo seems a bit crowded. Not terribly important but with that additional white space on the left side of the logo it makes the "everyday" part feel like it's encroaching. 
2) I think the "I love you" part is cute and will probably be just fine in Seattle
3) The "Seriously..." message, while funny to me could be interpreted wrong. I agree with snappyllama and my suggestion - Meant for washing your body, not your potty mouth


----------



## Obsidian (Apr 23, 2019)

I'm sorry but I don't care for it at all.  No ingredient list and the plain and mild is confusing as there is obviously something in it adding color. To me, plain is unscented and uncolored. Also, what is mild to you might be harsh to me, hence why ingredients are important.

As far as to your statement, that alone turns me off. I don't know if you are really that nice or if its just a marketing ploy but I tend to be skeptical and would think its marketing. It also sounds a bit stuck up, like your personal mission is going to make it good soap.  Unless you can get your soap legally certified USDA organic, leave that off.

Guess in the end, I want less about you and more soap info.

I like the logo but would suggest the everyday font be the same as everything else. No reason to make some words fancier, just make them easy to read. I like the & but I would choose a different font to it too so its a bit more recognizable.


----------



## atiz (Apr 23, 2019)

I actually like it a lot.

Regarding ingredients: I'm afraid the audience here might be a bit biased. At least, I don't think I had ever looked at any cosmetic ingredients (including soap) before I started making soap. Yes, now I would look at it, but not sure how much of your target will really care. (Allergies etc. is a different matter.)

I agree with the others that the front is *almost* too crowded, although for me it does not quite cross that line. I would probably have at most two different fonts on the front.
Personally I really absolutely totally dislike Times New Roman, so would not typeset my label with it, but that is just a personal preference. 
I think overall it looks really nice. And I don't mind the more personal messages on it; they are cute.


----------



## artemis (Apr 23, 2019)

atiz said:


> Regarding ingredients: I'm afraid the audience here might be a bit biased. At least, I don't think I had ever looked at any cosmetic ingredients (including soap) before I started making soap.



People with allergies will look. You'd be surprised the number of different things people are allergic to. One friend has a silk allergy. Another, cloves.


----------



## penelopejane (Apr 23, 2019)

^^^I agree and I think (no scientific evidence to back this up) the majority of people buying handmade soap have allergies or are looking for something pure or at least less “chemically” than commercial soap.


----------



## atiz (Apr 23, 2019)

artemis said:


> People with allergies will look. You'd be surprised the number of different things people are allergic to. One friend has a silk allergy. Another, cloves.


Yes, that's what I said 2 lines later. ("Allergies, etc., are a different matter.") 
We don't have any data on this so it's hard to know how many soap-buyers it affects. I used to buy handmade soap because they smelled nice and looked pretty, and that's it. If I were allergic to something, depending on the seriousness of it, I would either ask the seller or, if it really is very serious, not buy stuff that's not made in a laboratory.
Our grocery store carries Zum bars and they only list the ingredients on their website (they don't even have labels). A lot of people buy them. So that might be another option.


----------



## SideDoorSoaps (Apr 23, 2019)

If you are going to go back to Adobe CS, InDesign is still pretty boss for page layout. There’s also Affinity Designer which is relatively inexpensive. I have yet to check out the Pages program that was mentioned before. I can’t stand using PS for page layout. 

Upon first glance, I find the label busy and not very well organized. The hierarchy is off and the different fonts and weights don’t blend well together. It’s not a very harmonious label. The elements just are competing too much with each other without enough white space.

Technically, your logo doesn’t even need to go on the front of the label. It takes up some valuable real estate at the size it is at and I find it to be a bit clunky awkward. 

As for the specifics of the labeling, I’ve found Marie Gale’s book invaluable on the anatomy of a label. I’m a label reader. I’m also drawn to pretty packaging but the first thing I go for is ingredients, even before I made soap.

I kinda like the “love” stuff  must be my inner hippie. And I like the ampersand also but it seems odd in this useage. I’d play with that a bit. Maybe just use it one place in a clever way.

I’m constantly messing with my labels and never happy. I change my packaging look often. Good luck on your journey!


----------



## Misschief (Apr 24, 2019)

SideDoorSoaps said:


> If you are going to go back to Adobe CS, InDesign is still pretty boss for page layout. There’s also Affinity Designer which is relatively inexpensive. I have yet to check out the Pages program that was mentioned before. I can’t stand using PS for page layout.


Just for the sake of clarity, PagePlus is the precursor to Affinity Designer. There is no further support for PagePlus; however, it is still available for a reduced rate (full program).


----------



## Lin19687 (Apr 24, 2019)

Andrew said:


> The ingredients have to be on the label.  I would also list the scent on the front and leave a space for a UPC code.



 If there are no medical claims it does NOT have to have the ingredients on it.
Yes Scent should also be on there.
Not sure why you would need a UPC code spot.  That is not necessary unless the Maker has that coding system, most do not.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 24, 2019)

Lin19687 said:


> If there are no medical claims it does NOT have to have the ingredients on it.
> Yes Scent should also be on there.
> Not sure why you would need a UPC code spot.  That is not necessary unless the Maker has that coding system, most do not.


have as in legally have to? i guess it does not need to be on there.  The ingredients and UPC are just really helpful for selling at a store.  People look at ingredients all the time on products at shows and fairs and that cuts down on the same conversation 1000 a day.  People look to see if it has palm or is vegan as well as allergies.  Also people want to look at ingredient lists if OP get gets the product into a gift shop or other store.  Just my thoughts.  It doesn't hace to be there, but probably would be a good idea.

UPC codes would be for stores but can be added later on either another sticker or a quick redesign for the space.


----------



## Lin19687 (Apr 24, 2019)

@Andrew I was just responding to what you wrote.
You stated that ingredients HAVE to be on the label.  Legally it does not as I stated.

Most on here do not sell like you are saying,,,, store, UPC etc.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 24, 2019)

Lin19687 said:


> @Andrew I was just responding to what you wrote.
> You stated that ingredients HAVE to be on the label.  Legally it does not as I stated.
> 
> Most on here do not sell like you are saying,,,, store, UPC etc.


This thread is about getting labels eventually ready to sell publicly...  Stores will not carry a soap without ingredients and most will not without a UPC code.


----------



## atiz (Apr 24, 2019)

Andrew said:


> This thread is about getting labels eventually ready to sell publicly...  Stores will not carry a soap without ingredients and most will not without a UPC code.


This is not true. Our grocery store sells soaps without ingredients (Zum). They just have the loaves of soap out, you can cut yourself a slice and put it in a little baggie that you measure. People buy it a lot.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 24, 2019)

atiz said:


> This is not true. Our grocery store sells soaps without ingredients (Zum). They just have the loaves of soap out, you can cut yourself a slice and put it in a little baggie that you measure. People buy it a lot.


Yeah I have zum up here too.  the the ingredients list is right in the display.  It also is a national brand.


----------



## MGM (Apr 24, 2019)

I think ingredients are necessary...there's so much writing on that label (again, not necessary a flaw: think Dr Bronner!), and you're all about the planet and organic and plant-based....but then you don't list the ingredients. For allergies, but also just for interest's sake, I'd definitely list ingredients.
There are a few threads on perception of listing LYE vs sodium XXX-ate for label appeal so you can check that out. Also, where is Hendejm when you need him? Long gone, but he has good threads on visualizing your market demographic and labelling/selling to it.


----------



## earlene (Apr 24, 2019)

No, not all stores require an ingredients list and not all stores require a UPC code.  Some stores even sell naked soap, a practice I have since seen my favorite health food store stop doing, thankfully.  

But not all soap sellers sell in stores.  Many soapers here start by selling at farmer's markets and craft fairs.  I see a lot of soap for sale at those venues and rarely have I seen a UPC code on them.  Not sure about abroad (I didn't really look for UPC codes when I looked at soap at a craft fair in Europe.)

But of course, I do agree that ingredients should be on the label of every individual bar or bottle of soap.  Because as a consumer, I have always looked at ingredients lists on the products I buy and have always been pleased when the regulations require more information to protect the consumer.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 24, 2019)

"Ingredients:  Saponified oils of..." makes lye not on the ingredient list and avoid INCI listing like 'sodium tallowate' that sounds too chemically.  Even though all three are the same  saponified oils seems to have better appeal.


----------



## MGM (Apr 24, 2019)

Andrew said:


> "Ingredients:  Saponified oils of..." makes lye not on the ingredient list and avoid INCI listing like 'sodium tallowate' that sounds too chemically.  Even though all three are the same  saponified oils seems to have better appeal.


Yes, that was the gist of one discussion, except that people didn't want to say lard or tallow on their labels but also didn't want to say lye. Guess you could say "Saponified oils of pig and cow." And someone not that long ago was going to use deer fat!


----------



## earlene (Apr 24, 2019)

Using 'saponified oils of ...' is also controversial and not really the correct way to label soap for sale in the US.  I don't know about in Canada or elsewhere, but since the OP is in the US, I thought I'd point this out.

See this link:  https://www.mariegale.com/five-most-common-labeling-errors/

Marie Gale is an expert in the field of properly labeling products for sale by Artisans such as ourselves.  You can look deeply into the federal regulations, which are extensive and somewhat hard to maneuver, with references back and forth to other various regulations, or you can utilize the work Marie Gale has done to compile the information into easier to understand terms and get her book or read her site online.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 24, 2019)

MGM said:


> Yes, that was the gist of one discussion, except that people didn't want to say lard or tallow on their labels but also didn't want to say lye. Guess you could say "Saponified oils of pig and cow." And someone not that long ago was going to use deer fat!


my soap is olive oil based and has not palm.  part of the labeling is showing off the product.


earlene said:


> Using 'saponified oils of ...' is also controversial and not really the correct way to label soap for sale in the US.  I don't know about in Canada or elsewhere, but since the OP is in the US, I thought I'd point this out.
> 
> See this link:  https://www.mariegale.com/five-most-common-labeling-errors/
> 
> Marie Gale is an expert in the field of properly labeling products for sale by Artisans such as ourselves.  You can look deeply into the federal regulations, which are extensive and somewhat hard to maneuver, with references back and forth to other various regulations, or you can utilize the work Marie Gale has done to compile the information into easier to understand terms and get her book or read her site online.


Previous commenters and the same webpage states that soap does not in fact legally have to have an ingredient list at all.  

I have had store owners and customers ask endless questions about INCI labeling and lye and such.  Just giving my input as a regional brand and what has worked best for me in terms of selling product.  Which is the OP's end goal.


----------



## shunt2011 (Apr 24, 2019)

Andrew said:


> This thread is about getting labels eventually ready to sell publicly...  Stores will not carry a soap without ingredients and most will not without a UPC code.



That’s not true here either. There are several stores that carry unlabeled soaps.  Some are naked with nothing listed.  2 of these are all natural organic stores.  There are several gift shops in tourist towns that carry unwrapped, unlabeled soaps as well.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 24, 2019)

shunt2011 said:


> That’s not true here either. There are several stores that carry unlabeled soaps.  Some are naked with nothing listed.  2 of these are all natural organic stores.  There are several gift shops in tourist towns that carry unwrapped, unlabeled soaps as well.


I am honestly having quite a bit of trouble following your grammar so please forgive me if I misinterpret your comment.

I am pretty sure that the OP in the first comment mentioned selling soap to stores as an end goal.  " i have something on them that will be representative of (similar enough to) a finished and final label when we go public."  is pretty close to selling as a company.  Selling in stores is the next obvious step.

I am well aware that stores nationwide sell bulk soap without an ingredient lit on the soap.  I myself sell bulk soap with no labeling in more than one.  At that point, it is up to the store how to 1) display the soap and 2) what information to display with the soap.   I would argue that a start up selling NOT in the bulk section (as zum is if is by oz and cut your own) will have difficulty opening wholesale accounts with no ingredients on the labels.  

Redesigning packaging gets expensive in terms of time, energy, reintroduction to customers and store managers, etc..  But hey, I am just letting you know what I myself have gone through in the last 3 years.


----------



## Nanette (Apr 24, 2019)

penelopejane said:


> I personally think the label is too busy.  There are also too many different fonts for me.
> 
> Weigh 10 of your soaps (once you have settled on your mold and soap thickness) and get a minimum weight.  You can then put the lightest weight on your label. The weight of the soap after cure should not be less than the weight on the label but it can be more.
> 
> ...


I just thought of Dr. Bronners liquid soap labels.......lolol....


----------



## Marilyn Norgart (Apr 24, 2019)

Andrew said:


> I am well aware that stores nationwide sell bulk soap without an ingredient lit on the soap. I myself sell bulk soap with no labeling in more than one. At that point, it is up to the store how to 1) display the soap and 2) what information to display with the soap. I would argue that a start up selling NOT in the bulk section (as zum is if is by oz and cut your own) will have difficulty opening wholesale accounts with no ingredients on the labels.






Andrew said:


> The ingredients have to be on the label. I would also list the scent on the front and leave a space for a UPC code.



Andrew you seem to be all over the place--and I think you are being kind of===I don't know if its arrogance or if you are just in the mood for a fight.  but seriously?


----------



## penelopejane (Apr 24, 2019)

Nanette said:


> I just thought of Dr. Bronners liquid soap labels.......lolol....


You mean the busy labels? Pretty sure they only use one or two fonts, though. 

Mind you I really don’t like Dr Bronners stuff. I strongly object to “Pure Castile” with coconut oil and a million additives.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 25, 2019)

penelopejane said:


> You mean the busy labels? Pretty sure they only use one or two fonts, though.
> 
> Mind you I really don’t like Dr Bronners stuff. I strongly object to “Pure Castile” with coconut oil and a million additives.


I really like the Dr. Bronners packaging.  Bright, colorful/color coded and easy to understand packaging.  Turns out they don't use INCI labeling.  Bronner's story is a really great one.  He was quite crazy!

Dr. Bronner's is a bit drying for me.  I find it too bad that 'Castile' has morphed into a term for vegan soap rather than pure olive oil.


----------



## artemis (Apr 25, 2019)

Andrew said:


> Dr. Bronner's is a bit drying for me.  I find it too bad that 'Castile' has morphed into a term for vegan soap rather than pure olive oil.



A lot of people also find 100% OO soap to be too drying. Everyone's skin is different.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 25, 2019)

artemis said:


> A lot of people also find 100% OO soap to be too drying. Everyone's skin is different.


that is very interesting as olive oil is one of the gentlest oils for soap out there.


----------



## MGM (Apr 25, 2019)

penelopejane said:


> Mind you I really don’t like Dr Bronners stuff. I strongly object to “Pure Castile” with coconut oil and a million additives.


Yeah you have to get past the coconut oil-as-Castile for sure,  but what additives do you mean? Tocopherols and citric acid are the only ones I see.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 25, 2019)

Marilyn Norgart said:


> Andrew you seem to be all over the place--and I think you are being kind of===I don't know if its arrogance or if you are just in the mood for a fight.  but seriously?





Marilyn Norgart said:


> Andrew you seem to be all over the place--and I think you are being kind of===I don't know if its arrogance or if you are just in the mood for a fight.  but seriously?


I just got confused by the "soap with labels do not need ingredients lists because bulk soap sold in a store close to me with no labels has no ingredients listed on the nonexistent labels" comments.  I guess I did not use exactly the correct wording in my previous comments.

Coming back to the original topic, @SeattleMartin these labels by onlinelabels.com would also be great to use. They have glue on the back so you can make them nice and tight around the soap bar.  A slight added expense, but they add a professional touch and are a lot faster to put on which is nice when you have a lot to do.  I use the craft brown ones.  If you ever want to shrink wrap your soap as well this could go either under or over the shrink wrap.  

https://www.onlinelabels.com/products/ol1030?src=dlc-305&sr=1061529696

https://www.onlinelabels.com/products/ol1103?src=dlc-305


----------



## amd (Apr 25, 2019)

I like the label - I think "we care about you" is a nice touch. It says to me that you want a relationship with me, not just my money. Which, if you read about marketing, you will find that that there is a lot of discussion about making a connection with people. Those tear jerker ads... making an emotional personal connection. Anyways, the only thing that I would change is adding ingredients, correcting the weight to the correct notation, and contact information (important because I want to continue this relationship, so where can I follow you on social media, how can I talk to you?). As a consumer (I buy a lot of soap in addition to making it, I will be the cleanest person during the zombie apocalypse!) I don't buy without an ingredient list. I've run into sellers who don't have it labeled, and they give me a spiel about the ingredients, but then they give it to the next person and it's a completely different order. I want to know the correct order - if coconut is the highest oil I probably won't buy it - and I want to know what all is in the soap - essential oils? which ones? I was picky before I made my first batch and unfortunately soapmaking has made me even pickier  When I first started selling almost 4 years ago, almost no one read labels (in my area), now I have the opposite, more people are reading the label than not. Consumers are becoming more educated (sometimes falsely, but that's another post) but at least now I have a chance to educate them if they have questions or concerns.


----------



## Lefty (Apr 25, 2019)

Here are my 2 cents, for what it’s worth!

Front: The initial feeling I get is rustic and old fashioned. The style reminds me of something I’d see in a general store from days gone by, so if that is your intention, well done!

I like the ampersand in your logo (I use an ampersand in my logo too, so I’m partial!) I do agree, though, that I’d keep it in the logo, but change it to the word “and” anywhere else.

I really like the font you used for the word “Everyday,” but don’t really understand the point the word itself. Is it the name of the soap or its intended use? Adding on to that, I can’t really tell what the soap is called. Is it called “Everyday,” or “Plain & Mild” or is plain and mild just a descriptive term for the soap? Either way, I’d make plain and mild at least as wide as the word “Soap” or else it gets lost on the label.

Back:  I like the message since it gives us a feel for your mission, but I’d maybe shorten it and move it to the side of the label, and save the back for an ingredients list and contact information. I agree with the others here who prefer an ingredients list. In addition to making my own soap, I, too, like to try others soaps, but won’t buy it if the ingredients aren’t listed on the label.

Sorry to say, but the line “We love you…” sort of gave me the willies. I understand what you are going for, but it felt too personal an invasive to me. I think saying something like “We care about you…” may come across better. Maybe shortening it to “We care about you, and the Earth.”

Sides: I’d include the whole Facebook link so it is easier to find your company without having to do a Facebook search. You want to make it as easy as possible for your customers to get to you!

I also agree that the side message about not putting it in your mouth sounds too harsh and like it’s a dangerous product that I'd be weary of using on any part of my body. Maybe tone it down a bit. I do like the humor though!

Hope this helps and good luck with your business!


----------



## earlene (Apr 25, 2019)

*SeattleMartin*,  I know your prototype does not include ingredients, which you explained, but within the confines of responses to your request for feedback, it is clear many consumers will forego purchasing a product without an ingredients list.  Some suggestions have been made as a way to list ingredients for sale, but the mention of using the phrase '_saponified oils of _...' as an option brings me to point out that this is not the better option when listing ingredients on soap and I will explain why I say that.

Also it will not meet the US federal regulations if you ever sell a soap that can be called a cosmetic or drug by the FDA.  IMO, conforming all labels to meet the most restrictive regulations to start will make it far easier in the long run.  Granted, you may never sell a cosmetic or medicinal soap, of course.  But that would leave out a certain amount of expansion in your business.  Case in point: Many male soapers seem to like making and selling shaving soap, and as I read the law, that is a cosmetic by US federal standards, so cosmetic labeling laws would apply.

Further discussion about creating an ingredients list by using the phrase '_saponified oils of_...' followed by the list of oils that went into the pot:

Where does this leave the un-saponified portions of those oils?  Was the soap made with a superfat?  Even if not, are there not still unsaponfiables in soapmaking? Yes, in fact, there are.  (Hint - the lower the SAP value, the more unsaponifiables in the oils/fats/waxes.)

Therefore, is the use of 'saponified oils of ...' an accurate or inaccurate method of listing ingredients?  I suggest, as do others, that it is inaccurate, and in fact misleading.

*~ ~ ~ ~ ~*



Andrew said:


> Previous commenters and the same webpage states that soap does not in fact legally have to have an ingredient list at all.



That is irrelevant to my point about using the phrase '_saponified oils of_...' in the ingredients list for soap per the quote you sited, therefore I don't understand what point you were trying to make when you made this statement in response to my comment about using the phrase '_unsaponified oils of_...' on the ingredients label.  Regardless of the fact that I also have stated that the US regulations indicate that ingredients lists are not required for true soap (although is required for  cosmetic and medicinal soap).



Andrew said:


> I have had store owners and customers ask endless questions about INCI labeling and lye and such.  Just giving my input as a regional brand and what has worked best for me in terms of selling product.  Which is the OP's end goal.



And I am giving input as well, based on my understanding, research and many discussions here at SMF about proper labeling, and  from lectures and presentations at various soap maker conventions, seminars, etc. on the topic at hand.  I also saw '_saponified oils of_ ...' being used and when new, thought, sure 'why not?'  But that was before learning it is not really the correct way to label soap for sale.  And although I don't sell, it was recommended that labeling properly whether one sells or not, especially if one plans to sell eventually, should be the goal at the outset.  So for conformity's sake and being the federal regulations geek that my job of my profession made of me, I chose to follow the US federal regulations as best I can and stopped using that term on my soap ingredients list.

I, too, have numerous discussions with people who receive my soap.  Most of them had no idea how soap was made, and many of them would ask questions about the process and the ingredients when they learned I make soap.  Discussion of the ingredients list is part of the educational process for the customers, which IMO is a good thing.  Sadly, I have heard a few soap sellers give mis-information when having these discussions with their customers in the sales setting.  It is sad, but true, which is why we often have these discussions here at SMF to help clarify and separate such things as doing it the right way as prescribed by (in this case) federal regulations vs. what seems to be an accepted practice that is not considered the right way per the experts on the regulations in question as they pertain to the topic at hand.

Still, since it works for you and the soap you sell is only sold as 'a cleansing soap' and none can be construed as cosmetic (oh, wait, don't you sell shaving soap, which by definition is intended to improve ones appearance and provide a smooth shave and possibly sooth the skin?) I suppose you can list your ingredients anyway you want.


----------



## amd (Apr 25, 2019)

earlene said:


> Also it will not meet the US federal regulations if you ever sell a soap that can be called a cosmetic or drug by the FDA. IMO, conforming all labels to meet the most restrictive regulations to start will make it far easier in the long run. Granted, you may never sell a cosmetic or medicinal soap, of course


To build on Earlene's comment above... I believe that even though you may not market your soap as "moisturizing" [we know as soap makers it doesn't, but many soap makers still promote their soaps that way], all you need is one review or comment of your product that has a cosmetic or medical value (moisturizing, acne clearing, etc.) and then your soap will be considered cosmetic or medicinal. Reviews on your website, your FB business page etc. I can't remember where I read that, but it was a legitimate source so I trust it. I agree fully with Earlene's advice to label for all scenarios.

Once you have your ingredients format setup correctly on your label, it isn't a hassle to adjust for slight recipe deviations. I use SoapMaker3 software which will export my ingredient list in the correct order from each recipe I make. Then it's an easy copy and paste into my label. My recipes don't vary much by oils, but other additives or liquid replacements can be a hassle to figure out on my own. The right software makes it so much easier. My apologies for the slight deviation off topic, but as you expand into selling, a good soapmaking program is something you might want to consider and ingredient listings are just one of the benefits. [Again, really really sorry for straying from the critique of your label.]


----------



## Atihcnoc (Apr 25, 2019)

It's going to be your label, so personalize it, make it as you like it. If it's crowded, I will believe it's not going to be more crowded than Dr.Bonner's soap labels, they include also verses from the bible and other things that has nothing to do with soap.
So follow your heart and play with your logo, your fonts and everything you will like to be add it.
By the way, I'm a Graphic Designer and the first rule is...."Less is more"....... not always apply.
Just follow the rules, and good luck!!


----------



## SeattleMartin (Apr 26, 2019)

Hey everyone! I honestly thank you all so very much. I was hoping to respond to everyone in direct replies but I don't think I will have time. While I can't say that I agree with everyone, there are a good number of very valid points and opinions here.
I hope to clear a few things up real quick.


This was a prototype and it is actually just one of three current label prototypes. I have made about a dozen label prototypes in the past few months. This was actually the only one that did not list ingredients, but I will believe I will be providing ingredients on the label when all said and done.
If you were one of the ones to notice that the soap in the package was not what the label said, then congratulations. Truth is I just grabbed a soap to test the label size. I didn't think it really mattered much, but I can now see that I should be more careful so as to be very clear and avoid any confusions or distractions.
Yes, the Dr. Bronner brand is a bit of an influence, thank you for seeing that. Yes, I really am that sort of person. I actually do care. Maybe it makes me crazy or weird or creepy but I want to make it very clear that we, as a company, care for people and for our environment. However, I may stay a little more true to my roots as a designer and fall back on the K.I.S.S. theory of design.
I thought it was amusing, but thanks for pointing out that the mouth washing bit may not be understood or received well.

One point that I believe I want to explore and understand better is the matter of 'public opinion' and and how consumer perceptions may lead to being classified as a cosmetic or drug despite the soap maker's best and honest attempt at simply making, marketing and selling soap. Just soap. In fact, this is the one really big thing that I want to explore. I believe it was mentioned in this thread here:


earlene said:


> One example of how public perception can influence how a soap might fall into a cosmetic or drug category:  Historically,  pine tar is used medicinally and many people perceive pine tar soap as at the very least 'soothing', and often much more medicinal than that.  There is a long history of pine tar as a medicinal application for skin problems, therefore, if a soaper uses pine tar in their soap, they really should follow all the required labeling requirements for a drug, even if the soaper clearly states on the label that it is soap and only for cleaning.  Why?  Because the buyer is more likely than not, buying the soap for it's perceived medicinal application.  One can argue that it is not necessary if you state 'for cleaning only', but why not just follow the labeling requirements for a drug and rest easy?  It's not that hard to meet those requirements.



Again, thanks everyone. I need to get back to work now.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 26, 2019)

earlene said:


> *SeattleMartin*,  I know your prototype does not include ingredients, which you explained, but within the confines of responses to your request for feedback, it is clear many consumers will forego purchasing a product without an ingredients list.  Some suggestions have been made as a way to list ingredients for sale, but the mention of using the phrase '_saponified oils of _...' as an option brings me to point out that this is not the better option when listing ingredients on soap and I will explain why I say that.
> 
> Also it will not meet the US federal regulations if you ever sell a soap that can be called a cosmetic or drug by the FDA.  IMO, conforming all labels to meet the most restrictive regulations to start will make it far easier in the long run.  Granted, you may never sell a cosmetic or medicinal soap, of course.  But that would leave out a certain amount of expansion in your business.  Case in point: Many male soapers seem to like making and selling shaving soap, and as I read the law, that is a cosmetic by US federal standards, so cosmetic labeling laws would apply.
> 
> ...


This is a very interesting discussion and I enjoy reading everyone's points of views.  

Soap packaging I believe is regulated by the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act.  Shaving soap is also regulated in the same manner as it is not a cosmetic.  So the good part is if you get into shaving soaps then you do not have to change your labeling.

As DeeAnna has described in a different post and Marie Gale describes, you can list the ingredients as they go in the pot to cook or come out.  Both are just as accurate if you do it correctly.  In  my experience people tend to look at the ingredients for 1) vegan 2) palm 3) allergies 4) and high end ingredients like jojoba, cupuacu, and abyssinian oils.  

If you do put lye in the ingredients list, then putting a foot note saying none of it is in the finished product will save a lot of questioning.  And limiting the amount of questions from packaging at shows is essential.  

The more I think of it, the more I like ZUM packaging.  Company name, product, and variation are all top down right on the front.  Ingredient list is on one side and I assume a description is on the other with the UPC on the back.  I also find it interesting that they use my ingredient method.  Patcha looks like it has a similar cigar band layout, but with an ingredient list that lists the lye.  

I would personally look at cigar bands that wrap up and down the label.  This way it will not wiggle down or fall off if the bar shrinks too much.


----------



## earlene (Apr 27, 2019)

Andrew said:


> Shaving soap <snip> is not a cosmetic.



Marie Gale disagrees with you on shaving soap, as you can see here: 
https://www.mariegale.com/melt-pour-soap-soap-cosmetic/

Read down on Marie's response to a question about CP shaving soap and if it is a cosmetic on May 7, 2016.

_But even more to the point_, so does US Federal Regulation as of April 1, 2018:
*CFR - Code of Federal Regulations Title 21*

https://www.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/cdrh/cfdocs/cfcfr/CFRSearch.cfm?fr=720.4

Look at
*§720.4 (4) (c) (11) (vi)*

Shaving soap is listed as a cosmetic, therefore, the FDA considers it a cosmetic, therefore, it should be labeled as a cosmetic according to FDA regulations and the CFR. 

Perhaps you missed that update to the law, but it's right there in black and white in the Federal Register.


----------



## earlene (Apr 27, 2019)

SeattleMartin said:


> Net weight... Approximate Net Weight?  <snip>
> 
> I don't even need to use "net weight" but just simply state the weight?



I just   wanted to address this question.  Throughout the various parts of the regulations pertaining to labeling of the weight of consumer commodities, this phrase is included: " *The terms “net weight” or “net wt.” shall be used when stating the net quantity of contents in terms of weight,* ".  Now although it is not in every portion of the law as it pertains to how to label each and every category of consumer commodity, as someone who has repeatedly met with regulators in my profession (retired now), I would not use that as an excuse to avoid using the phrase 'Net wt.'  or 'Net weight'.

In my former life dealing with federal regulators, that kind of argument did not ever fly.  You might never have to deal with a federal regulator, but all it takes is one complaint by a consumer to have them down on you sending you one of those 'misbranding' letters and you would have to change all your labels.  Better to put 'Net Wt.' or 'Net weight' on from the start.

ETA:   NO, I WAS WRONG:

I just found this:
*§500.9   Units of weight or mass, how expressed.*
(a) The term net weight or net mass may be used in stating the net quantity of contents in terms of weight or mass. However, where the term “net weight” or “net mass” is not used, the quantity of contents shall always disclose the net quantity of contents. For example: “453 g (1 lb)” or “Net Wt 1 lb (453 g)” or “Net Mass 453 g (1 lb)”.

Oops, you already did read that!  I just re-read your post wherein you even quoted it.  Apparently I only skimmed that post!  The regs certainly are hard to maneuver, aren't they?  Anyway, I am sorry for not reading your reference more thoroughly!


----------



## Andrew (Apr 27, 2019)

Earlene,

This is for cosmetics.  Shaving soap, by definition from the FDA, is a true soap and thus not regulated by the FDA.  Or, at least the artisan wet shaving products most people including me make.  Please understand that you cannot look into comments of an old article and use it to make broad statements about the current industry.   

The short answer is that this woman is confused about how products in the industry are marketed.  Please feel free to contact me via private message if you have any further questions so we don't hijack the thread.  You were happy enough to do this when you wanted information about soy wax in calculators.


----------



## earlene (Apr 27, 2019)

Andrew, Title 21 of the Federal Register is dated April 1, 2018.  That is not old; it is actually fairly recent.  It is adminsitered by the FDA, as it is clearly written in the title.

The listing therein is for cosmetics, yes, and if you look down the page, shaving soap is listed as a cosmetic.  "(vi) Shaving soap (cakes, sticks, etc.). "

There is no need to discuss this privately.  The entire community here makes soap, many make shaving soap, so the topic is of interest.  The fact that you are saying the FDA does not define a shaving soap as a cosmetic here in this thread, indicates that you do not agree with the regulations set forth by the FDA in the Federal Register, which I linked.

And I take umbrage to you telling me what I can and cannot look up in an article about our industry.  The fact that Marie Gale, an expert in the field, stated in 2016 that CP shaving soap is a cosmetic, and the FDA states as much in 2018 in the Federal Regulations, certainly seems to me as though what was true in 2016 is still true today only a few months later, since there is no new regulation replacing the 2018 regulations as far as I am aware.

ETA:  New thread started on this topic:  Shaving Soap is regulated as a cosmetic according to the FDA in the U.S.



SeattleMartin said:


> One point that I believe I want to explore and understand better is the matter of 'public opinion' and and how consumer perceptions may lead to being classified as a cosmetic or drug despite the soap maker's best and honest attempt at simply making, marketing and selling soap. Just soap. In fact, this is the one really big thing that I want to explore. I believe it was mentioned in this thread here:



This has been in the back of my mind and I ran across something today that might address it, from the perspective of the FDA.  It is included in the FDA website here:  https://www.fda.gov/cosmetics/cosme...smetic-drug-or-both-or-it-soap#Definecosmetic

Scroll down to the section titled:  *How is a product's intended use established?*


One thing that is very notable to me in the difference in how we label 'true soap' and how we label a 'cosmetic soap' is how we list the colorants in said soap.  The FDA has a list of ingredients that have to be listed in cosmetics a certain way, and by just listing 'mica' for all micas used in a 'cosmetic soap', we may very well be in violation.  So it is important to know if a soap can be ruled a cosmetic under the FDA's regulations.   The above link could get you started on that.

Kenna of Modern Soapmaking explains it quite simply here regarding listing micas in cosmetics (which soap may well be in some circumstances.)  Scroll down to "Labeling Mistake #6".

One thing that I have found to be very informative is to attend soapmaking conferences with presenters who are experts in the field, legal experts who address changing regulations and are always willing to answer specific questions as necessary.  If you ever have a chance to attend one, you might really enjoy it.  I know I have.


----------



## Andrew (Apr 28, 2019)

earlene said:


> Andrew, Title 21 of the Federal Register is dated April 1, 2018.  That is not old; it is actually fairly recent.  It is adminsitered by the FDA, as it is clearly written in the title.
> 
> The listing therein is for cosmetics, yes, and if you look down the page, shaving soap is listed as a cosmetic.  "(vi) Shaving soap (cakes, sticks, etc.). "
> 
> ...


This is very interesting and I greatly thank you for starting that new thread.  I look forward to keeping this thread on labels which has made me think more and more about my own.


----------



## Lin19687 (Apr 28, 2019)

PLEASE note that if you are selling your soap and you Verbally state that the soap is Moisturizing or anything other then 'it is soap, it cleans' then you have just made your soap a cosmetic.

The word "Advertising" includes things you say while you are selling your soap.


Back to the LABEL in 1st post.

1)  Put Ingredients on the label, if it is a Organic oil, then list that in the ingredients.

2) take out what you have on the back, that goes on your website.  Saying you use and like to use Organic oils means poop unless you list ingredients ... see #1

3)  Not sure what you meant when you said     "previous labels included ingredients but it felt to be a bit much work when also listing the ingredients with the online listing"
To me, this statement looks like it would be too much work for you. Like you are cutting corners.
either list the ingredients or don't.

4)  I know this is said but you list just what the Minimum weight of the soap will be when it is sold.  You said you search regulations but clearly didn't if you put appx. 


you should probably learn to swim & run before you do a triathlon.  You need to learn to make a good soap before you start to sell it.
It looks like you decided to sell soap before you learned how to make it.  It doesn't work that way and you won't be making $$$$$$$ of money off of it.


----------



## SeattleMartin (Apr 29, 2019)

Lin19687 said:


> To me, this statement looks like it would be too much work for you. Like you are cutting corners.
> either list the ingredients or don't.  You said you search regulations but clearly didn't if you put appx.
> you should probably learn to swim & run before you do a triathlon.  You need to learn to make a good soap before you start to sell it.
> It looks like you decided to sell soap before you learned how to make it.  It doesn't work that way and you won't be making $$$$$$$ of money off of it.



I appreciate your feedback but this is not a discussion about my product or how good it is. However, if you must know I have not had any bad feedback on my products (in particular soap, but if you must know I actually do have several other products in development.) In fact, I have literally had to double and triple production on some soaps and this is just with family and friends. I have already somehow started acquiring investors without even trying. So... yah. There is that.

To wit, I am far from trying to cut corners but I am also largely a one person operation using my experience, knowledge and sometimes even expertise in various fields such as: Chemistry; Cooking; Photography; Design (print and online);  Printing; Marketing; etc. Must I go on?

I actually did read lots of rules and regulations and LAWS and ... well whatever. To be honest, I really wanted to see if it was something the community here would think is admissible and what, if any, their experiences in this are. I wanted perspective. I was also trying to understand a very vaguely written piece of ... actually I think earlene understood it pretty well if you would like to go back and revisit her reply.



Andrew said:


> This is a very interesting discussion and I enjoy reading everyone's points of views.
> Soap packaging I believe is regulated by the Fair Packaging and Labeling Act.


Glad we agree on how interesting this is 
You are right about the FPLA, but the shaving soap is where I discovered (before posting this thread) that some soap becomes cosmetic simply because it is a 'shaving product' and everything that earlene said. Sucks but ... ? Well this is what it is in the USA. I can't wait to dive into the international stuff. I will probably start with Canada and Mexico, then delve a bit into EU. Sounds lovely! Also, trying to design my shaving soap labels has only been slightly less frustrating than developing the shaving soap. At least that has been my experience. 
Also, thanks for all your feedback. I am listening. Go ahead and be all over the place in my threads. I don't mind, to be honest. 



earlene said:


> The regs certainly are hard to maneuver, aren't they?  Anyway, I am sorry for not reading your reference more thoroughly!


They really are, and I cannot thank you enough for understanding that I really am just trying to navigate an ever-changing landscape while very honestly doing the right thing and being a decent person. It means quite a bit to me and my business partners. We have a particular vision (admittedly it is mostly my vision, but one they believe in) that is forming and taking shape. And thanks for taking the time to help me understand some of this. I really do mean that. 

All of that aside, I do want to thank you all once and again for your feedback and sorry I have not been able to reply to you all personally. I also hope that this helps to enlighten others in terms of labeling and clear up some of the questions that I believe we all have. 

Much Love,
Marty (Anna, Martin & Co.)


----------



## earlene (Apr 29, 2019)

Good luck with your business, *Marty*.  

BTW, it's been awhile since I've spent much time in Seattle, but it was lovely every time I have been there.  I'm originally a California gal, but have family all over the West Coast, including one brother in northern Washington (about as far north as it gets, without being in Canada.)  I remember one year coming back from visiting baby bro in Washington and absolutely loving the changing colors of the trees along my route toward or through Southern Washington.  I am not even sure where I was exactly when I saw those gorgeous color-changing trees, but the route was southern because I was not really headed home exactly at that point.


----------



## Bladesmith (Apr 30, 2019)

Misschief said:


> If you're familiar with InDesign, you might want to check out Page Plus. It has a lot of the same features as ID but, at $27.99, it's a much better deal. It is a legacy product with no further customer support but the price is right and it's a pretty powerful program. I use it at home and I have it on my work computer as well I work in a print shop; the designers use ID but I really don't need it as I'm in sales. Every now and then, though, I'm called upon to put something together for a customer and Page Plus works just great.



Ive been reading through this thread and saw your recommendation for Page Plus. I picked it up for $19.99 and must say... What a great deal! The feature set is fantastic and it can do more than I need. Thanks for the recommendation!


----------



## Misschief (Apr 30, 2019)

Bladesmith said:


> Ive been reading through this thread and saw your recommendation for Page Plus. I picked it up for $19.99 and must say... What a great deal! The feature set is fantastic and it can do more than I need. Thanks for the recommendation!


You are very welcome! I'm glad you checked it out.


----------



## bobryan1 (May 1, 2019)

I love the simplicity of the label. Right away from your label I got the impression you were just "down-home" people making a soap that you want people to appreciate for the simplicity of it. I hand cut my soaps as well and I know personally, no 2 are ever the exact same weight. I don't know the legalities of it because I don't really "sell" it publicly, but when I have messed around with a couple labels, and I have put "minimum weight" on the label. In both oz and grams. Does that work or does the law prohibit it to sell publicly? Also, I think the ingredients really should be listed on the label.


----------



## earlene (May 1, 2019)

bobryan1 said:


> I love the simplicity of the label. Right away from your label I got the impression you were just "down-home" people making a soap that you want people to appreciate for the simplicity of it. I hand cut my soaps as well and I know personally, no 2 are ever the exact same weight. I don't know the legalities of it because I don't really "sell" it publicly, but when I have messed around with a couple labels, and I have put "minimum weight" on the label. In both oz and grams. Does that work or does the law prohibit it to sell publicly? Also, I think the ingredients really should be listed on the label.



Not in the US, but I don't know where you live, bobryan1.  Net weight is what the regulations in the US require and that means per unit at time of sale.  So it's okay to list the least amount of weight it will weigh, but not more than that, as mentioned before in the thread.  Of course you have to look into the regulations for your given point of sale, should you plan to sell elsewhere.  But your use of ounces and grams leads me to believe you are in the US, and that's good that you are using ounces and grams.


----------



## SeattleMartin (May 1, 2019)

earlene said:


> Good luck with your business, *Marty*.
> 
> BTW, it's been awhile since I've spent much time in Seattle, but it was lovely every time I have been there.  I'm originally a California gal, but have family all over the West Coast, including one brother in northern Washington (about as far north as it gets, without being in Canada.)  I remember one year coming back from visiting baby bro in Washington and absolutely loving the changing colors of the trees along my route toward or through Southern Washington.  I am not even sure where I was exactly when I saw those gorgeous color-changing trees, but the route was southern because I was not really headed home exactly at that point.


Thanks! We got our license today.
My mother was born and raised in Cali, actually. I have not been able to spend much time there, personally. I hail from central Illinois originally and moved to Seattle in the mid 90's. I have traveled a bit, lived in Florida for awhile, but Washington has become my home. Love it here.  Glad you enjoyed it out here too. I hope Illinois has been a great place for you. I do miss it a bit sometimes. It has it's own beauty. Especially the wide open skies and the starlit summer nights.



bobryan1 said:


> I love the simplicity of the label. Right away from your label I got the impression you were just "down-home" people making a soap that you want people to appreciate for the simplicity of it. I hand cut my soaps as well and I know personally, no 2 are ever the exact same weight. I don't know the legalities of it because I don't really "sell" it publicly, but when I have messed around with a couple labels, and I have put "minimum weight" on the label. In both oz and grams. Does that work or does the law prohibit it to sell publicly? Also, I think the ingredients really should be listed on the label.


Thanks for the feedback. That really is what we're going for in terms of identity and branding. We want that old general store, down home sort of feel.
Honestly, if you're not really selling publicly, you probably don't need to stress too much? Though, if you would like to be technically correct in listing the weight, I think you could just drop the word "minimum" use the lowest weight of the lot and goodness forbid somebody weighs your soap and finds it to be over the stated weight they will likely be very happy and probably won't complain.  Just my two cents. 

One last note, things are going so surprisingly well that we should have our soap cutter really soon which feels like a big relief in terms of consistency for size and weight.  We still may not be selling publicly anytime real soon, but as long as everything continues to move in the right direction .... sky is the limit?


----------



## amd (May 1, 2019)

SeattleMartin said:


> Though, if you would like to be technically correct in listing the weight, I think you could just drop the word "minimum" use the lowest weight of the lot and goodness forbid somebody weighs your soap and finds it to be over the stated weight they will likely be very happy and probably won't complain.


That's how I do it! My soaps are labeled Nt Wt 4.0 ounces, but typically weigh 4.3 to 4.7 ounces after a year.


----------



## SideDoorSoaps (May 2, 2019)

Misschief said:


> Just for the sake of clarity, PagePlus is the precursor to Affinity Designer. There is no further support for PagePlus; however, it is still available for a reduced rate (full program).



I did look into this finally and saw it’s just for windows. I think that’s why I only thought of Affinity. I use a Mac 95% of the time. But for $20 I might put it on my hub’s laptop!


----------

