I wasn't aware that they use foamcore behind the canvas, but I was aware there was something solid behind the print. Personally, I like that it's not wrapped like a drum although I appreciate the longevity of wood and staples. It's possible I should offer a couple of levels of canvas prints, but in any case I've been really impressed so far with CGProPrints.

I am thoroughly impressed with them so far. I made a sample for myself and then I recently made one for a client, both times with great results.

Our 20x30 canvas just arrived. Looks great! The colors are spot-on, however I have yet to have a color issue with any print vendor since switching to a Dell Ultrasharp/Spyder3Pro setup. The fit and finish is very nice. I understand the concerns about the long term durability of CG's foam/adhesive product versus wood frame/staples. I guess time will tell, but so far we're very pleased with the product, especially given the price.

John, would you let your kid jump up and down on it for a few hours and let us know how it holds up? I think that would be a pretty good test.

Indeed, Ian, I'll give that a shot!

I ordered a 24x36 sample of a black-and-white image. The print quality is quite good.

Three issues. First, the top two corners had suffered from a bit of chipping, probably when they folded the corners (the folds are very tight, and on the fold, some of the ink just seems to have come off). CG seems to have used a black magic marker to cure the right corner, which was mostly black anyway, and that wasn't noticeable until I inspected it very closely. The left corner was a dark-to-mid-tone grey, and they left it un-fixed, meaning the tightest exterior folds just had a little bit of white canvas. That was too visible, so I tried a bit of black magic marker, and smudged it a bit, and that mitigated the problem. It's not perfect, though, so I wouldn't deliver this to a client.

Second, there's a very small -- maybe two millimeter long and a thread's width -- red mark embedded in the canvas in the lower middle. It seems to have been introduced in production -- it looks like ink and I can't scrape it off with my fingernail. It is so small that you don't see it on big-picture examination, but again, I wouldn't deliver it to a client.

Third, the packaging provides inadequate protection from side damage. This is probably a key difference between a foam-core and a wood frame: the box was dented in the middle of the front-side corner, and that produced a 5mm dent in the front right part of the frame. The cardboard on the top and bottom of the packaging has a crush chamber, but the left and right don't, leaving it vulnerable to this kind of damage.

Any one of these problems would be enough not to deliver the product to a client.

I'm going to call them about these issues and I'll let you know how that goes.

Huh. This came seven minutes after submitting my customer service inquiry.

Ian-
Thank you for contacting us. Please accept our sincere apologies for your disappointment with your gallery wrap. We are committed to providing you with the best product available, and we appreciate you giving us another chance to meet your expectations. Any pictures you may have available would very helpful and may be attached to this email chain.

A replacement print for image Anne and Eric wrap brenzier.jpg, on order 100050063 has been requested and put right back into production. Please know that you will NOT be charged for this order. Once again, please accept our sincere apologies. We greatly appreciate both your trust and business, and we look forward to serving you again in the future.

If you have any further questions or concerns about this order or any order, do not hesitate to contact us.

Best Regards,
Ashley Patterson
Senior Customer Service Rep

I haven't had any of those issues but I think they'll send you a new one right away no problem.

Ian Ivey wrote:
I ordered a 24x36 sample of a black-and-white image. The print quality is quite good.

Three issues. First, the top two corners had suffered from a bit of chipping, probably when they folded the corners (the folds are very tight, and on the fold, some of the ink just seems to have come off). CG seems to have used a black magic marker to cure the right corner, which was mostly black anyway, and that wasn't noticeable until I inspected it very closely. The left corner was a dark-to-mid-tone grey, and they left it un-fixed, meaning the tightest exterior folds just had a little bit of white canvas. That was too visible, so I tried a bit of black magic marker, and smudged it a bit, and that mitigated the problem. It's not perfect, though, so I wouldn't deliver this to a client.

Second, there's a very small -- maybe two millimeter long and a thread's width -- red mark embedded in the canvas in the lower middle. It seems to have been introduced in production -- it looks like ink and I can't scrape it off with my fingernail. It is so small that you don't see it on big-picture examination, but again, I wouldn't deliver it to a client.

Third, the packaging provides inadequate protection from side damage. This is probably a key difference between a foam-core and a wood frame: the box was dented in the middle of the front-side corner, and that produced a 5mm dent in the front right part of the frame. The cardboard on the top and bottom of the packaging has a crush chamber, but the left and right don't, leaving it vulnerable to this kind of damage.

Any one of these problems would be enough not to deliver the product to a client.

I'm going to call them about these issues and I'll let you know how that goes.


Since you have a "bad" canvas, is there any way you could find out if there really is an mdf layer on either side of the canvas or if it is simply styrofoam with no backing layers? (or could there be a paper backing like with standard foamcore?)

Since you have a "bad" canvas, is there any way you could find out if there really is an mdf layer on either side

Ha! You want me to rip it open? If they don't want it back, I'll use it as a sample, so I'm afraid we won't be peeling the layers back on this one.

Ian Ivey wrote:
Since you have a "bad" canvas, is there any way you could find out if there really is an mdf layer on either side

Ha! You want me to rip it open? If they don't want it back, I'll use it as a sample, so I'm afraid we won't be peeling the layers back on this one.


dang

I may have to buy one just to cut in half, haha (I may try to peek in on a bottom edge first)

SloPhoto wrote:


Since you have a "bad" canvas, is there any way you could find out if there really is an mdf layer on either side of the canvas or if it is simply styrofoam with no backing layers? (or could there be a paper backing like with standard foamcore?)



Here it is:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rdkirk/8368144797/in/photostream/lightbox/

RDKirk wrote:
SloPhoto wrote:


Since you have a "bad" canvas, is there any way you could find out if there really is an mdf layer on either side of the canvas or if it is simply styrofoam with no backing layers? (or could there be a paper backing like with standard foamcore?)



Here it is:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/rdkirk/8368144797/in/photostream/lightbox/




Thank you so much! I am slightly disappointed that it is not melamine with a mdf backing only on the mount side. (for acoustic damping properties).

On the other hand, looks like it would be fairly durable.

Wow... I didn't realize that's all that was in the inside... Hm.

Perhaps I need to go back to my expensive canvas after all... BUT for short-life samples and stuff, can't complain!

BUT for short-life samples and stuff, can't complain!

Yep, that's why I use them for my marketing displays. I'll probably start using them for lower-end sales as well, but I haven't created the right pitch yet. They will probably have to replace my bottom-line of framed-but-not-conservative line, because they are certainly more profitable at that level than even cheap framing.