studio printing vs. pro-lab??? A million and 1 questions.

MissB

I am toying with the idea of getting a professional grade printer for my studio. I am currently purchasing my prints thru WHCC and love the quality and haven't had any issues with them as of yet.. However there seems to be a big perk to offering images as fast as same day... SOOOOooo...

1. whats the consensus here about studio prints vs. pro-lab prints??
2. cost effectiveness and quality..(quality being key) For some reason I feel like the printer wouldn't do a good enough job to justify it..if the price of the printer was under say ...$500? Am I delerious?? Are there superb printers out there for less than $500?
3. If so.. I what brands do you suggest.. if not... where to next.. what do you recommend.
4. Another question... Does the crowd here generally print on lustre or glossy photo paper.. how long do the prints seem to last...(same as pro-lab photos..or less?)
5. how many prints to do you see before its time to replace the printer cartridges?
6. What type of studio printer should I purchase... inkjet, laser.. obviously I haventt he slightest clue.

Anyway.. I'll spare you more questions..for now..hehe. Thank you!!

missB:lust

Art Scott

how do you percieve the 1 hour photo lab? The same as your "pro" lab??? I bet not......what 99.9% of the people do not realize is that both the 1 hr and pro labs use the same machines to deveope their film and papers........at least in my area....all trhe machines were the same.....the difference comes in who cleans and maintains the machines better.........

As to injet printing as opposed to photo paper process printing.......we know that a properly processed bw can last over a hundred yrs...we have them, glass plates, tintypes and paper prints.....color can last a long time but the jury is still out on just how long a really good 'chrome print can last......prints from negs can last 20-50 yrs before color shifts........
Inkjet...the jusry is still out......

Now same day prints.....perceived quality.....to me very low.....Want to print in studio....make'em wait a week at least....why for percieved quality and value.....I cannot process them that fast and do it correctly.......I'll call when ready to pick up.....

other side of coin.....pro printers usually are large enuff to take roll paper, not sheets.....cost is enormous..... and you will really need a person to do it......YOUR a SHOOTER......save your processing and printing for FINE ART WORK.....leave the portraits and wedding to WHCC and keep shooting...............

just my very umble opin..................

colourbox

MissB wrote:

1. whats the consensus here about studio prints vs. pro-lab prints??...For some reason I feel like the printer wouldn't do a good enough job to justify it..

"the printer" is actually you. Printing is like shooting. Equipment is like 10% of the result. Operator skill is 90%. For you to consistently equal WHCC on your own printer, you will probably need to study and master the printing workflow and color management. How to create a file that prints well, how to coordinate your profiles and printer driver settings to deliver exactly what you want. WHCC are superb, and not because they have more expensive equipment, it is because they make a real effort to know color printing inside and out and in depth.

if the price of the printer was under say ...$500? Am I delerious?? Are there superb printers out there for less than $500?

Excellent photorealistic printers are available in that price range. That is to say, they can print very nice looking prints. But at what real cost? If they print on dye inks, the color fidelity is amazing but they are more prone to fading. Also, the cost of ink per ounce is very high on the cheap printers with their small cartridges.

how long do the prints seem to last...(same as pro-lab photos..or less?)

Depends on the combination of ink and paper. To get both quality and longevity, most aim for the pigment ink printers that are $700 and up. To understand how print longevity works and see ratings for typical photo printers, read this web site:
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/

how many prints to do you see before its time to replace the printer cartridges?

Again, "cheap" printers run out much faster because the cartridges are tiny, with expensive ink that isn't as colorfast. "Expensive" printers above $700 actually come with large cartridges with more archival pigment ink, and since the cartridges are larger it is less expensive per ounce and you get far more prints per cartridge.

An "expensive" printer may prove to be cheaper total cost in the long run if you make a lot of prints and are not wasting all kinds of paper and ink because you haven't mastered the printing workflow yet.

What type of studio printer should I purchase... inkjet, laser.. obviously I haventt he slightest clue.

For sales or fine art, basically you want pigment inkjet. Color lasers produce the cheapest prints and are ideal for offices, but the quality is not suitable for high end photographic prints.

An easy answer is the Epson 3800. I love mine, everybody I know who has one loves theirs too. Fast, bigger cartridges to lower ink cost, excellent color and B&W. $1200, but again, calculate your long term ink costs if you think a $400 printer will be "less expensive."

MissB

colourbox wrote:

"the printer" is actually you. Printing is like shooting. Equipment is like 10% of the result. Operator skill is 90%. For you to consistently equal WHCC on your own printer, you will probably need to study and master the printing workflow and color management. How to create a file that prints well, how to coordinate your profiles and printer driver settings to deliver exactly what you want. WHCC are superb, and not because they have more expensive equipment, it is because they make a real effort to know color printing inside and out and in depth.



Excellent photorealistic printers are available in that price range. That is to say, they can print very nice looking prints. But at what real cost? If they print on dye inks, the color fidelity is amazing but they are more prone to fading. Also, the cost of ink per ounce is very high on the cheap printers with their small cartridges.



Depends on the combination of ink and paper. To get both quality and longevity, most aim for the pigment ink printers that are $700 and up. To understand how print longevity works and see ratings for typical photo printers, read this web site:
http://www.wilhelm-research.com/



Again, "cheap" printers run out much faster because the cartridges are tiny, with expensive ink that isn't as colorfast. "Expensive" printers above $700 actually come with large cartridges with more archival pigment ink, and since the cartridges are larger it is less expensive per ounce and you get far more prints per cartridge.

An "expensive" printer may prove to be cheaper total cost in the long run if you make a lot of prints and are not wasting all kinds of paper and ink because you haven't mastered the printing workflow yet.



For sales or fine art, basically you want pigment inkjet. Color lasers produce the cheapest prints and are ideal for offices, but the quality is not suitable for high end photographic prints.

An easy answer is the Epson 3800. I love mine, everybody I know who has one loves theirs too. Fast, bigger cartridges to lower ink cost, excellent color and B&W. $1200, but again, calculate your long term ink costs if you think a $400 printer will be "less expensive."

wow thank you for talking the time to give detailed answers.. actually thank you to both of you!! I do concur that the cheaper initial investment will probably not be the most effecient long term answer...Im starting to feel like I should just stick with WHCC and my free shipping... and save myself the hassle... thank you so much!

Art Scott

MissB wrote:

Im starting to feel like I should just stick with WHCC and my free shipping... and save myself the hassle... thank you so much!

YOur very welcome.....I enjoy helping when i can........

Back in the day when I was shooting as many as 3 weddings on any given Saturday and doing portraits and weddings on Friday and Sunday (for those that do not follow the Sunday as sabbath tradition).....I found I had no time to fire up my Omega 4x5 enlarger and do proper justice to all the pix......I was very good in the darkroom but it simply was a time thing.....I had a heated roller and tube set up for the film (20 rolls of 35mm or 10 of 120/220) at a time........I just could not keep up.......so I found a great PRO Processor and never looked back until it went belly up do to embezzelment .....then I started using the one I have now, but not after suing people in Chicago, L.A. , Seattle, San Fran, and a couple in New York.........finding someone your trust with your work is hard but once you do......hang on to them.......a good working relationship with a supplier is invaluable and a lot of small upstart companies do not embrace their clients like they should.............

That is why I print locally instead of thru SM......I know these people and if I have a prob....I can go in and take hold of the owners by his shirt collar and give him a gentle shak'in:D......I am going to give Bay a try thru SM in the future and see how they work out..........



I personally know several photogs that have real nice 36" wide printers but they do not print anything but their own Fine Art work.......

MissB

Art Scott wrote:

YOur very welcome.....I enjoy helping when i can........

Back in the day when I was shooting as many as 3 weddings on any given Saturday and doing portraits and weddings on Friday and Sunday (for those that do not follow the Sunday as sabbath tradition).....I found I had no time to fire up my Omega 4x5 enlarger and do proper justice to all the pix......I was very good in the darkroom but it simply was a time thing.....I had a heated roller and tube set up for the film (20 rolls of 35mm or 10 of 120/220) at a time........I just could not keep up.......so I found a great PRO Processor and never looked back until it went belly up do to embezzelment .....then I started using the one I have now, but not after suing people in Chicago, L.A. , Seattle, San Fran, and a couple in New York.........finding someone your trust with your work is hard but once you do......hang on to them.......a good working relationship with a supplier is invaluable and a lot of small upstart companies do not embrace their clients like they should.............

That is why I print locally instead of thru SM......I know these people and if I have a prob....I can go in and take hold of the owners by his shirt collar and give him a gentle shak'in:D......I am going to give Bay a try thru SM in the future and see how they work out..........



I personally know several photogs that have real nice 36" wide printers but they do not print anything but their own Fine Art work.......

wow my head is spinning at your busy schedule.. thats crazy!!! But fantastic! Good advice that im def. going to heed..

f-rider

For what it is worth, I bought an Epson R1800 which prints up to 13" wide (13x19 paper or 13 wide rolls by 44 length, or more) in order to satisfy my need to see my work and create the image from capture to print. I am extremely satisfied with the R1800. I calibrate my LCD monitor and have been getting the best results from using Lightroom 2.5 for printing. For now, I use only Epson papers, and have settled upon Epson Lustre Pro paper and use that setting when setting up the R1800. I have used other papers, including the cheaper Inkpress, some HP papers for 4x6's (which I use to make desk calendars with my photos).

I'm a relatively advanced amateur and did spend some time fussing around to get the prints to look like what I was editing (using Nikon's Capture NX and Lightroom for post processing). But the results are stunning to me and to everyone I show my prints to. While this is not by any means a production printer, it has more than satisfied my needs. 13x19 is a big print, especially with a mat board and my interest in panoromics allows me to print a 13 x 44 inch pano by simply switching to roll paper.

I have not calculated the cost compared to print service bureaus but, like I said, for me this is part of the gratification I get from capturing a wonderful photo, doing all I can to improve it in post processing, then watching it come out of the printer. I can stand to do all the work then send it off to a printer and have to wait a week or so to get it back. I still do that occasionally, and use SmugMug's metallic papers for some of my winter time and ice climbing shots (perfect combo, IMHO) but love to print my own stuff. Again, I am not a production pro and enjoy taking time to select my best shots, post process them, print and mat (I mat & frame my own, too,)

The R1800 has been replaced with the R1900 and the Epson site lists it now for $399 with free shipping. Ink is comparatively expensive but that is true for any printer. The color cartridges are independently replaceable and I've not had any clogging issues (knock on wood !). It is very difficult to gauge how much ink is used per print in my workflow, as I do mostly landscapes and the inks are depleted at different rates, depending on the photos you print over time, or if you print B&W.

I would do it again in a heartbeat, with the R1900. Hope this helps, happy to answer questions.

r9jackson

I know this is an old thread, but was looking up some of the information today. I use the Epson R1900 at work and it prints stunning glossy photos. Like the others say the ink is fairly expensive. The folk at Red River paper have a study they did on costs of printing at http://www.redrivercatalog.com/cost-of-inkjet-printing.html
I think it looks like .63 for an 8 x10. Of course, they are trying to sell their paper which I have heard is very good.