Which printer?
fish
Registered Users Posts: 2,950 Major grins
My old Deskjet 970 is great for everyday stuff...from printing emails to slide presentations, but it sucks for photos.
Which photo printer would you recommend? I'm not sure I need one of the big old honkin' jobs that will do 13x19 borderless, but 8x10 would certainly be a reasonable size. Canon? Epson? Let's hear your recommendations.
tia
Which photo printer would you recommend? I'm not sure I need one of the big old honkin' jobs that will do 13x19 borderless, but 8x10 would certainly be a reasonable size. Canon? Epson? Let's hear your recommendations.
tia
"Consulting the rules of composition before taking a photograph, is like consulting the laws of gravity before going for a walk." - Edward Weston
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
0
Comments
Currently I use an Epson Photo Stylus 2200 - I wanted 16x20 but settled for 13x19 inch and Ultrachrome pigment based inks. I also own an Epson 960 for printing on CDR's. It uses dye inks and prints lovely glossy 8x10s. I have used HP printers, but when I bought the 2200 I decided to go with the ink and the company that the majority of photographers seem to prefer, even tho we use HPs to print images at the office. Go figure - you have to go along with your partners to get along some times.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Don't forget that Costco, Sam's Club, Wal-marts, etc around the country have installed Fuji Frontiers and Noristu printers that turn out great prints, inexpensively and quickly on real photo paper, matte or glossy. If your color is good and in srgb colorspace you should get pretty close to what you see. That equal no fussing with ink or drivers, etc. The Noritsu I print on can handle up to 12x18 prints.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
I'm leaning toward the Canon i960 ($200!). Seems to be getting good reviews and it's available. The other option is the Epson R800, but it seems to be backordered all over and is twice the price of the i960. I'd have to see similar prints in person to know if it's twice the quality, but somehow I doubt it. I've also heard reports of problems printing 4x6 and with clogging on the R800.
Anybody have any experience with the Canon i960?
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
To be honest there are a lot of pretty good printers out there. I hit the review sites before I bought mine, an Epson R300. I remember the Epsons as having a slight edge in print quality, which is why I went for one, but I definitely took a gander at the i900 -- they're all over the place at decent prices.
The R300 had a few features I wanted, though: An LCD panel for printer status (no more guessing what the blinking lights mean!) and six individual ink tanks.
A reason to consider HPs is that the ink jets are part of the ink cartridge rather than being separate. That means a new one each time you put in a new cartridge, which can't be anything but good for quality. On the other hand it means it's going to be more expensive.
I note that I still haven't seen a consumer grade printer that had good enough quality for anything but proofs IMO, although I admit to having used it to make a picture that I hung at my desk at work :-). When I want a quality print I take it to the pros.
jimf@frostbytes.com
It does well on photos but will not print large sizes. But I would opt
for a better quality printer at somewhere like Costco for the few times
I need it.
Overall, I am very happy with the i860.
Ian
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
Canon i960. Couldn't pass up the quality/$. $199 at Best Buy. I bought a 120 pack of 4x6 paper and a 7 port USB hub with it, and they gave me a $30 gift card. Not a bad deal.
Took about 15 mins to set it up, made a couple of prints (8x10 on Kodak 8.5 x 11 premium picture paper and a 4x6 borderless on Canon Photo Paper Pro.
Wow. Excellent.
"The Edge... there is no honest way to explain it because the only people who really know where it is are the ones who have gone over."-Hunter S.Thompson
they pointed out a site that they buy their ink from inkgrabber.com http://www.inkgrabber.com/ They are selling ink for the canon i960 at $2 a cartridge. My first order will be here next week. I'll let you know how well the ink works.
--Bryan
Lynn
We sold a Deskjet 970 last time we upgraded photo printers, about a year and a half ago. You're right, it did NOT make very good (or durable) photo prints -- for a long time, the dear spouse used its photo prints as an argument to blow off digital and stick with film in order to get "real" photo prints.
When we sold the 970, we paid $200 at the time for a used HP 7550 (available sometimes at Fry's now for $79!). It's a 7-ink system and does a pretty fine job -- so far, *I* am (my Photoshop, etc skills) are the limitation, not the printer. HP claims that the 7550's inks, on HP premium glossy photo paper, has something like 65-year durability (per Wilhelm Research). The 7550's successor, 7660, is available for something like $150 if I recall.
Down the road, I may consider a printer that can make prints larger than 8x10 (e.g. Epson 2200 or similar), but for now the 7550 is doing a great job by me.
Epilogue re my wife's position on digital prints: she still shoots film, herself, but now accepts digital prints as just fine for her major need: scrapbooking (which she has really gotten into). That's a major shift from her position back in the "OfficeJet" days :-).
= bug
Supported by: Benro C-298 Flexpod tripod, MC96 monopod, Induro PHQ1 head
Also play with: studio strobes, umbrellas, softboxes, ...and a partridge in a pear tree...
Re the InkGrabber.com cartridges -- you want to make sure that those cartridges are filled with Canon ink (which is unlikely, as I doubt that Canon sells its ink in bulk to anyone). I used to buy off-brand ink cartridges until even Consumer Reports totally blasted them as a "bad buy" . The off-brand inks don't have the durabilty (sometimes 1 year compared to 60 years), the colors aren't always as accurate, and most damning of all, they don't even work out to be cheaper to use.
(also note: if print longevity is important to you, the particular combination of paper and ink is very important)
Supported by: Benro C-298 Flexpod tripod, MC96 monopod, Induro PHQ1 head
Also play with: studio strobes, umbrellas, softboxes, ...and a partridge in a pear tree...
The new digital printers that have been installed at Wal-Mart and Sam's are printing film where it has a digital look. I am very disappointed in the pictures I receive from them now that they have the new printers. Does anyone else have this problem?
Are they Frontiers? The professional photo shop I use to do my printing has one of those and aside from only having 8-bit resolution (they complained when I gave them 16-bit tiffs :-) the picture quality is excellent.
Someone else said that the Frontier gives you pictures that a "pretty close to what you see." I found that the color match is excellent but it tended to print a little darker than my monitor was displaying using the stock color profile for Photoshop. It's pretty darn close now that I installed the color profile for the printer though.
jimf@frostbytes.com
It is probably not worthwhile to print large photos at home.
Big Photo http://www.bigphoto.com Will print virtually any size for $3.75 /square ft.
Wally
What does everyone think about the new Epson 4000. Kind of pricey, but it looks like it might actually be able to replace a pro lab. Has anyone seen any prints from this 80 lb hog?
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
Two days and no reply to you, so I thought I would.
I myself am curious as to how good a printer can get. To me, a photographic print always looks different than even the best ink jet prints. Photographic paper just has a different texture, sheen, feel, even if the detail isn't any better.
I notice that you seldom are told a price-estimate per photo from these printer reviews. How much does a typical 8x12 cost? 11x14? 16x20? Maybe we need the equivalent of an EPA estimated miles per gallon rating for printers.
The first question that popped into my mind, when I read your question, was what quality are you expecting from the printer in order to replace your pro lab? And I mean "quality" in the general sense: not just image quality, but other qualities as well, such as price per print, time per print, printer maintenance, convenience of in-house printing, the space the printer will occupy, and how many prints/months/years it takes to pay back the price of the printer.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
Plus, its just really cool to be able to make your own prints....
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
No, they are not. Either because they do not know how good it COULD be, or they are truly happy with the way something is already. My neighbor showed me a picture of her child's baseball team. You know, three rows of players, coaches in the fourth row, stair-stepped, etc. The photographer had the DOF so shallow that the coaches weren't in focus anymore. I found that an amazing error, but my neighbor didn't even notice until I told her about it. She was happy until I had informed her.
Also, sometimes the customer is concerned about something that you are not, and vice versa. You could bust your butt "fixing" a part of the image, while neglecting what the customer thinks is most important. I was at a dirt bike track this morning showing off my photos. In general I get very high remarks on my photos, but I learned something today -- bikers want to see flying dirt, rooster tails, in shots of them riding. I had great shots, but few with rooster tails. So sometimes it isn't that the customer isn't as picky as the photographer, but maybe picky about something different.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
I've only done two commissioned sessions so far, so the work was not great on my part. I did a shifter kart race, non-commissioned, and to make the work flow easier I shot in fine-JPG mode in the camera. Used a custom white-balance and Av mode and trusted the camera on the rest. It actually worked very well. I've done some MX the same way.
I don't shoot RAW unless the image is going to be real tough to expose properly, or unless its a commissioned shot. And most shots, like the racing, I won't tweak much at all. As you said, most people are happy with less. I need to put my time into the marketing side, growing a business. A photo 10% better is not going to get me any more customers.
A former sports shooter
Follow me at: https://www.flickr.com/photos/bjurasz/
My Etsy store: https://www.etsy.com/shop/mercphoto?ref=hdr_shop_menu
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
He spoke VERY highly of it Also said it is large, heavy ( 80 lbs) and expensive. - It is as good a printer as is available anywhere today. This comment comes from a fine art printer and photographer!! I suspect that properly used the printer is much better than we are. It uses Ultrachrome inks like the 2200, 7600, 9600 all do.
I want one myself this fall. I have been looking for a printer that will print 17x22 at home and the 4000 will do that on roll paper.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com
TML Photography
tmlphoto.com