Photo Printer Suggestions?

Helen wrote:
> I needed to downsize the contents of my home, so I decided to sell
> things I have no use for. I made a tidy sum of approximately $600.
> I'm looking for a good photo printer. I'll be honest, I know nothing
> about them, so I decided to ask the pros on the groups before I go
> into a photo shop and be at the mercy of some salesperson. Thanks for
> your help.

See also comp.periphs.printers

Photo quality with a long life depends on:

- paper quality
- ink (or pigment) quality
- mounting

Accuracy in colour requires calibration and profiling.

There is no middle ground AFAIK.

So either cheapish colour printers which use dye based inks (I just
bought a Canon MP530 at Staples for CAD$79.95 but I don't use it for
photos). This includes a scanner and fax. These print very good color
photos on good paper (eg: Epson, Kodak, other glossy and semi-gloss
papers). But they will fade in 10 - 30 years or so depending on how
they are mounted and kept. (With more extravagant care, they could go
50+ years). Limited to 8.5" wide prints (so 8x10, 8x12, ...). Not sure
how many photos a set of carts will print. (Some people claim dye based
inks last longer than the above, I don't agree).

Or get a pigment based pro printer such as the Epson 3800 (CAD$1249 at
Vistek) which comes complete with carts good for about 600 8x12" prints.
Will print up to 17" wide as well. This will produce prints that
will last 50-100 years without noticeable fading if mounted and kept
with care. With more extravagant care 100 - 200 years. I just bought
one hardly used (was still on original carts) for $750 and it is a gem.
Wonderful prints. When the inks run out, a full set of carts (9) is
about $550.

--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
-- usenet posts from gmail.com and googlemail.com are filtered out.
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 08:33:15 -0700, Helen wrote:

> I needed to downsize the contents of my home, so I decided to sell
> things I have no use for. I made a tidy sum of approximately $600.
> I'm looking for a good photo printer. I'll be honest, I know nothing
> about them, so I decided to ask the pros on the groups before I go
> into a photo shop and be at the mercy of some salesperson. Thanks for
> your help.

There are two great wide format printers that can print most of the sizes
a hobbyist would need.

Canon Pro9000
or
Epson 2880

Both will print the same sizes. The Canon prints may be somewhat more
vivid and look slightly more impressive on glossy paper but it uses dye
ink that does not have the longevity against fading as a pigment ink
printer has.

The Epson 2880 has a somewhat greater tendency to clog if not used on a
regular basis and uses somewhat more ink than the Canon. You also have to
manually switch between photo black used for glossy paper and matte black
used for matte and artistic papers and you do waste some ink in doing that
so you need to plan or batch your printing to some extent.

The prints from the Epson will fare much better over time and will look
better when using artistic and matte papers.

I have always used Canon printers and preferred the bang of a bright and
vivid color print. But I think I will go with the Epson 3800 next time
because I plan on using more matte and artistic papers and I want the
longevity. The 2880 is the little brother of the 3800. The K3 ink set is
the same but it uses smaller tanks and is 13"wide instead of 17" wide.
The 2880 is within the price range you suggested.

Because the 3800 is 17" wide and gets better ink mileage it is worth the
additional $450 since you get that much in additional ink with it but the
choice is yours.
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 14:10:47 -0400, Alan Browne wrote:

> Helen wrote:
>> I needed to downsize the contents of my home, so I decided to sell
>> things I have no use for. I made a tidy sum of approximately $600.
>> I'm looking for a good photo printer. I'll be honest, I know nothing
>> about them, so I decided to ask the pros on the groups before I go
>> into a photo shop and be at the mercy of some salesperson. Thanks for
>> your help.
>
> See also comp.periphs.printers


But if you go there be careful. That group has many many morons and
idiots that beleive in NOT using appropriate ink recommended by the
printer mfg and do not like others that do not subscribe to their cultish
views.
>
> Photo quality with a long life depends on:
>
> - paper quality
> - ink (or pigment) quality
> - mounting
>
> Accuracy in colour requires calibration and profiling.

Maybe. If you have need to really get accurate and do not want to deviate
at all from total reality then yes but if you want to get very close and
produce a really nice looking print that you and others can enjoy then
reasonable profiling should get you close enough. It is very difficult to
look at you monitor and your print and see exactly the same shade.



>
> There is no middle ground AFAIK.
>
> So either cheapish colour printers which use dye based inks (I just
> bought a Canon MP530 at Staples for CAD$79.95 but I don't use it for
> photos). This includes a scanner and fax. These print very good color
> photos on good paper (eg: Epson, Kodak, other glossy and semi-gloss
> papers). But they will fade in 10 - 30 years or so depending on how
> they are mounted and kept. (With more extravagant care, they could go
> 50+ years). Limited to 8.5" wide prints (so 8x10, 8x12, ...). Not sure
> how many photos a set of carts will print. (Some people claim dye based
> inks last longer than the above, I don't agree).
>
> Or get a pigment based pro printer such as the Epson 3800 (CAD$1249 at
> Vistek) which comes complete with carts good for about 600 8x12" prints.
> Will print up to 17" wide as well. This will produce prints that
> will last 50-100 years without noticeable fading if mounted and kept

under glass and I personally do not like prints mounted under glass.
First unless you get very expensive museum glass you will see some
reflections. Notwithstanding the reflections, cost and weight; you just
cannot appreciate the look and feel of artistic papers when viewing the
print behind glass. You might as well use a semi gloss paper. I really
would like to know just how much less a pigmented print will last if
properly cared for matted and frames but not under glass.


> with care. With more extravagant care 100 - 200 years. I just bought
> one hardly used (was still on original carts) for $750 and it is a gem.
> Wonderful prints. When the inks run out, a full set of carts (9) is
> about $550.
>
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

Helen wrote:
> I needed to downsize the contents of my home, so I decided to sell
> things I have no use for. I made a tidy sum of approximately $600.
> I'm looking for a good photo printer. I'll be honest, I know nothing
> about them, so I decided to ask the pros on the groups before I go
> into a photo shop and be at the mercy of some salesperson. Thanks for
> your help.

Have you considered not buying a photo printer? They are nasty plasticy
things that dry up, clog, get stuck and then cost a fortune to refill
with 'official' ink.

A good alternative is an online printing service, or even your local
printshop. Just make sure that they use genuine photographic paper and
the results will always be good.

I use photobox.co.uk, obviously you would need a similar firm where you
live. Photos are easy to upload to their site and prints are dispatched
the same day. I usually get prints in the next mornings post.
DavidM
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

DavidM wrote:
> Helen wrote:
>> I needed to downsize the contents of my home, so I decided to sell
>> things I have no use for. I made a tidy sum of approximately $600.
>> I'm looking for a good photo printer. I'll be honest, I know nothing
>> about them, so I decided to ask the pros on the groups before I go
>> into a photo shop and be at the mercy of some salesperson. Thanks for
>> your help.
>
> Have you considered not buying a photo printer? They are nasty plasticy
> things that dry up, clog, get stuck and then cost a fortune to refill
> with 'official' ink.
>
> A good alternative is an online printing service, or even your local
> printshop. Just make sure that they use genuine photographic paper and
> the results will always be good.

Except this last sentence regarding local printing is wishful thinking
for some; absolute bollocks for others. Only a handful of folk who are
luckily situated can say this.

>
> I use photobox.co.uk, obviously you would need a similar firm where you
> live. Photos are easy to upload to their site and prints are dispatched
> the same day. I usually get prints in the next mornings post.

Nothing can beat the Espon 3800 for fidelity and longevity.

--
john mcwilliams
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

"John McWilliams" wrote in message

>
> Nothing can beat the Espon 3800 for fidelity and longevity.
>
> --
> john mcwilliams


The OP admits to knowing nothing about colour printers. Do you really think
she wants a wide format printer costing about 3 times the available funds?
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

On 2008-10-04, John McWilliams wrote:
> DavidM wrote:
>>
>> I use photobox.co.uk, obviously you would need a similar firm where you
>> live. Photos are easy to upload to their site and prints are dispatched
>> the same day. I usually get prints in the next mornings post.
>
> Nothing can beat the Espon 3800 for fidelity and longevity.
>

Really? I'll take your word, ignore it, and stick with Fuji Fronteras.

--
savvo orig. invib. man
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

N wrote:
> "John McWilliams" wrote in message
>
>>
>> Nothing can beat the Espon 3800 for fidelity and longevity.

>
> The OP admits to knowing nothing about colour printers. Do you really
> think she wants a wide format printer costing about 3 times the
> available funds?

Re-read the parts you snipped. I was correcting another poster's statements.

Besides, Helen is a fast study, and deserves the best.

--
lsmft
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

Helen wrote:
> I needed to downsize the contents of my home, so I decided to sell
> things I have no use for. I made a tidy sum of approximately $600.
> I'm looking for a good photo printer. I'll be honest, I know nothing
> about them, so I decided to ask the pros on the groups before I go
> into a photo shop and be at the mercy of some salesperson. Thanks for
> your help.

Since your printing will be at an entry level, I'd suggest you START
with an entry level printer. All inkjet printers are so good nowadays,
that you will be delighted with your results from a good, simple, entry
level Canon. The new, Canon Pixma iP 3500, for instance, costs $79 (or
less) and the replacement ink cartridges are reasonably priced.
If you ever outgrow the 3500 (unlikely in 2-3 years), you will then have
enough experience to know what specifications you want to upgrade to.

Photo printing from online sources or at WalMart/Costco type stores is
so competitive, that you can get excellent quality prints, usually for
less than it would cost you to print the pictures yourself.....AND....
the colors are more stable than those from consumer inkjet printers.

Bob Williams
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

On Sat, 04 Oct 2008 20:46:38 +0100, DavidM wrote:

> Helen wrote:
>> I needed to downsize the contents of my home, so I decided to sell
>> things I have no use for. I made a tidy sum of approximately $600.
>> I'm looking for a good photo printer. I'll be honest, I know nothing
>> about them, so I decided to ask the pros on the groups before I go
>> into a photo shop and be at the mercy of some salesperson. Thanks for
>> your help.
>
> Have you considered not buying a photo printer? They are nasty plasticy
> things that dry up, clog, get stuck and then cost a fortune to refill
> with 'official' ink.


I have been printing with a Canon photo printer IP4000 for 5 years. It
has never clogged up and I never had a problem with it. While it may cost
a little bit more than an online service my prints are actually better
and I print what I want when I want on the type of paper that I want.

I have many more choices.

>
> A good alternative is an online printing service, or even your local
> printshop. Just make sure that they use genuine photographic paper and
> the results will always be good.
>
> I use photobox.co.uk, obviously you would need a similar firm where you
> live. Photos are easy to upload to their site and prints are dispatched
> the same day. I usually get prints in the next mornings post. DavidM
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

On Sun, 05 Oct 2008 10:02:21 +1100, N wrote:

> "John McWilliams" wrote in message
>
>>
>> Nothing can beat the Espon 3800 for fidelity and longevity.
>>
>> --
>> john mcwilliams
>
>
> The OP admits to knowing nothing about colour printers. Do you really think
> she wants a wide format printer costing about 3 times the available
> funds?

Nobody gives a damn on if it is a wide format or standard format printer.
What is important is the kind of results one wants and what they are
willing to pay for it.

If a person want to hang enlargements on their walls or give them to
others than a wide format printer is justified and is affordable.
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

Helen wrote in
2952a92ae421.DeleteThis@v53g2000hsa.googlegroups.com:

> I needed to downsize the contents of my home, so I decided to sell
> things I have no use for. I made a tidy sum of approximately $600.
> I'm looking for a good photo printer. I'll be honest, I know nothing
> about them, so I decided to ask the pros on the groups before I go
> into a photo shop and be at the mercy of some salesperson. Thanks for
> your help.


Forget the printing photos at home thing unless it's B&W you fancy and then
be prepared for serious print costs... Like about 28¢ for a 6"x4" print.
More if you want to use decent paper.

Instead of this absurd notion people have that owning a desktop printer is
somehow going to give you whatever it is you think it will (and it won't)
....open an account with "Snapfish.com" (owned by HP).

Instead of a printer, invest in a spyder to calibrate your screen and the
long lasting prints you get back from HP will always look amazing. Sharper
than an inkjet and no colour bleaching issues. No messy inks and best of
all, no regular cost for new ink tanks.

Snapfish are absolutely guaranteed to supply you prints at less than half
the cost of the cheapest inkjet printer and deliver them to your door
inside a week.

Like Alan Browne just told you, $500 worth of ink to replensih a desktop
pigment printer... Any size pigment printer actually.

Anything else is not worth having. Figure it out. 10¢ per print from
Snapfish = 5000 prints for the cost of one set of ink tanks.

Even getting 8"x12" prints done will still get you nearly 200 for the cost
of a set of ink tanks. And don't forget the mess of spray coating your
inkjet prints to even look like getting them to last as long as a real
photo.

Factor all your test prints into the desktop inkjet and you'd need a pretty
good reason to be able to justify owning one, wouldn't you?
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions? 

Alien Jones wrote:

> Like Alan Browne just told you, $500 worth of ink to replensih a
> desktop pigment printer... Any size pigment printer actually.

Having read and absorbed all that, let me simply state that I adore my Epson
R800 pigment-based printer. I can replace all 8 tanks for a lot less than
$500 (genuine dye - much less for clone).

There is no doubt that a home inkjet printer makes little or no sense
economically...

-but-

...it is priceless for producing extremely high quality prints *instantly*.
(Well five minutes actually, but that feels like "instantly" when compared
to "less than a week.")

If I have a bunch of prints to produce (some event or other) I'll use a
lab -but- if I just want ot produce a one-off, or if I particularly want to
produce a very specifically tailored print - or if I want the print *NOW*
(not next week) then I'll use the Epson. The results are spectacular,
instant but quite expensive.

If one of my kids wants a quick print-out, I'll use the cheap dye-sub
postcard printer. They love it - instant, on-demand and OK quality.

If I were living on a fixed income I probably would elect for the cheap
alternative, and farm it all out to the lab, but I can afford better than
that.

If you are very patient, the lab is satisfactory.
Likewise, if you don't mind complaining about poor printing and then
demanding reprints.
Likewise if you don't mind sharing your private copyrighted masterpieces
with some junior lab operator with an (who knows what) agenda.

If you appreciate the luxury of producing your own custom output in the
comfort of your own home, and you can afford the premium, then a home inkjet
makes sense.

I can't speak for brands other than Epson (such as the
buy-for-the-price-of-the-ink Lexmarks), 'cause I've never owned one. They
have to be better than interminable waits IF you can afford it.

I use my colour laser for proofs, but its nowhere near photo quality.
Cartoonish, but OK for proofs and layouts.

--
Jeff R.
 >> Stay informed about: Photo Printer Suggestions?