Calling those who print

[VTRich]

I had tried printing myself years ago and found it a frustrating process (printer clogs, dust on paper, etc) and settled on using WHCC. They were definitely cheaper. Then this last year I decided to print at home again and purchased a Canon Pro-1000. I have to say the results are stunning. The printers, inks, and papers have come a long way since I last tried. I'm sure it's more expensive, but can print what I want, when I want it, and I find the end result much better than what I was getting from WHCC or Bay Photo. I've had no clogging or feeding issues with my printer.

 

[JoelKlein]

I had tried printing myself years ago and found it a frustrating process (printer clogs, dust on paper, etc) and settled on using WHCC. They were definitely cheaper. Then this last year I decided to print at home again and purchased a Canon Pro-1000. I have to say the results are stunning. The printers, inks, and papers have come a long way since I last tried. I'm sure it's more expensive, but can print what I want, when I want it, and I find the end result much better than what I was getting from WHCC or Bay Photo. I've had no clogging or feeding issues with my printer.

WHCC isn’t printing, they use a different method. I’m not sure the process

 

[Warren D]

WHCC isn’t printing, they use a different method. I’m not sure the process

Incorrect, in fact, the process is more like traditional photo printing than using inkjet. The name of the machines escape me, but they convert the digital image to light and then expose traditional light sensitive paper which is then developed. 30 years ago, Image Craft in AZ had several of these machines and there were several high-end fine art photographic printing companies that used that technology (but with more expensive machines. I have several of that style prints on display for over 20 years and they are as bright and crisp as they were the day they were delivered. I'd bet the process has evolved but according to the WHCC website, they print on light sensitive paper which, as I said, is more in line with photographic printing than what is typically done today.

 

[JoelKlein]

Incorrect, in fact, the process is more like traditional photo printing than using inkjet. The name of the machines escape me, but they convert the digital image to light and then expose traditional light sensitive paper which is then developed. 30 years ago, Image Craft in AZ had several of these machines and there were several high-end fine art photographic printing companies that used that technology (but with more expensive machines. I have several of that style prints on display for over 20 years and they are as bright and crisp as they were the day they were delivered. I'd bet the process has evolved but according to the WHCC website, they print on light sensitive paper which, as I said, is more in line with photographic printing than what is typically done today.

Printing with light, produces a better portrait print?

 

[Wes Peterson]

Printing with light, produces a better portrait print?

Not today. Color inkjet by almost every measure, including longevity, produces better results. Which is why WHCC charges less for photographic prints than they do for their fine art prints which are inkjet.

 

[Whiskeyman]

I use WHCC.

I’m curious, would a home printer setup be expensive?

The price range runs a wide gamut. For a really good photo printer, the short answer is likely yes. The SC-P900 I use now retails for $1249 US. It often has a rebate offer, like now, with a $200 US rebate. A full set of ink cartridges costs about $450. On top of that, I've got about $2000 of various papers that I both use and experiment with.

For a 4x6, how much would the price be? About..

There are dedicated small print photo printers for prices just over $100 to in the $1000s range, depending upon its capacity and print quality.

I'll ask why you want to limit your printing to 4x6? One of the nice things about printing your own photos is that you can print larger prints, and other than standard print sizes. I've printed up to 17 x 44 with my P900. I could go longer than the 44-inches if I had a photo worthy of such. Now that I've started printing on canvas, I wish that I had a place to put and owned a 24-inch printer. And it's likely that if I had a 24-inch printer, I'd wish that I had a 44-inch printer, and so on. So, to keep it real, if I want to print anything bigger than my 17-inch P900 can print, I'll take it to a store in Pensacola to have it printed.

 

[bleirer]

My understanding is when you get a low cost print from a drugstore or by mail you are ordering what is called a C-print, which is similar to the old enlarger method in the sense that there is paper with light sensitive coatings that gets processed in a series if chemical baths. Except instead of an enlarger projecting the whole image the paper is exposed with LED lights or lasers. The quality depends on the quality of the coated paper which can range from very high to not so high, also the quality control in refreshing the chemistry, and and the resolution of the lights. So good results are possible.

Another method is inkjet/giclee which does not use light sensitive paper. This is what home printers use, and there is a huge range of quality in the paper that is chosen and the resolution and quality of the printer. but can be taken to a very high level in commercial printing with specialised RIP software and large format printers. With what they label fine art prints pigments rather than less lightfast dyes are sprayed from nozzles onto paper, and the choice of fine art printing papers is broad in terms of texture, thickness, base color, etc. You can get a free set of samples from places like bay photo or paper makers like Hahnemuhle. These can be extremely archival and top quality.

The way I get how acrylic prints are made, a paper print is fused permanently to the back of the acrylic and sometimes a sheet of aluminum protects the back. For canvas prints you can choose to have a paper print fused under pressure to the canvas or have the inkjets spray directly on the canvas. Metal prints I understand are made with inks infused into the base metal either white or natural metal and a protective coating is sprayed over that matte or glossy, etc.

To me it is part of the art to choose the print treatment. Some images call me to go for fine art paper of a certain texture, others evoke canvas or acrylic or metal. It's all good because it's the form of the work the artist chooses, just as a painter might choose to work on canvas or paper or a panel or plywood or directly on a wall or ceiling.

 

[Whiskeyman]

Not today. Color inkjet by almost every measure, including longevity, produces better results. Which is why WHCC charges less for photographic prints than they do for their fine art prints which are inkjet.

There are variations within the inkjet print world. The most significant difference being between dye ink prints and particle/pigment ink prints. Paper choice also has an impact on print life. Display/storage is one of the biggest factors in print life.

 

[Whiskeyman]

My understanding is when you get a low cost print from a drugstore or by mail you are ordering what is called a C-print, which is similar to the old enlarger method in the sense that there is paper with light sensitive coatings that gets processed in a series if chemical baths. Except instead of an enlarger projecting the whole image the paper is exposed with LED lights or lasers. The quality depends on the quality of the coated paper which can range from very high to not so high, also the quality control in refreshing the chemistry, and and the resolution of the lights. So good results are possible.

Another method is inkjet/giclee which does not use light sensitive paper. This is what home printers use, and there is a huge range of quality in the paper that is chosen and the resolution and quality of the printer. but can be taken to a very high level in commercial printing with specialised RIP software and large format printers. With what they label fine art prints pigments rather than less lightfast dyes are sprayed from nozzles onto paper, and the choice of fine art printing papers is broad in terms of texture, thickness, base color, etc. You can get a free set of samples from places like bay photo or paper makers like Hahnemuhle. These can be extremely archival and top quality.

The way I get how acrylic prints are made, a paper print is fused permanently to the back of the acrylic and sometimes a sheet of aluminum protects the back. For canvas prints you can choose to have a paper print fused under pressure to the canvas or have the inkjets spray directly on the canvas. Metal prints I understand are made with inks infused into the base metal either white or natural metal and a protective coating is sprayed over that matte or glossy, etc.

To me it is part of the art to choose the print treatment. Some images call me to go for fine art paper of a certain texture, others evoke canvas or acrylic or metal. It's all good because it's the form of the work the artist chooses, just as a painter might choose to work on canvas or paper or a panel or plywood or directly on a wall or ceiling.

The retailers near me that offer photo printing (Walgreens, CVS, Office Depot, etc. ) all use injet printers. None of them use the process that you've described. I'll look for a place that produces c-prints, as I'd love to compare the quality of my prints to those; it sounds intriguing.

 

[BLev65]

Unless you print all the time store printing is a lot less hassle and overall cost. I used to print and lost more ink to clogged print heads than ever made it onto paper. Pick a store/lab and stick with it. It takes a bit of trial and error to figure out your file export settings to get predictable results.

Regarding hanging prints I use 3M command strips. No holes and you can use different sizes for framed, unframed, metal prints, etc. Foam board is certainly the lightest medium to mount prints. If you're going to mount them yourself it's messy if you use contact adhesive. Also it's not very durable. The edges get beat up with handling if you plan to swap out prints from time to time.

All of this is true, but there is something fun about being able to spontaneously print a gallery quality print at home. I still miss the tactile nature of photography... pouring out slides on a light table, editing them with a loupe, and scanning them. While I know the work I can do and actually do today far surpasses that from the 80's and 90's, I miss the physical interactions that were a part of this craft. Printing allows me to do a bit of this... even if the prints simply get filed in a cabinet.

bruce

 

[NorthernFocus]

All of this is true, but there is something fun about being able to spontaneously print a gallery quality print at home. I still miss the tactile nature of photography... pouring out slides on a light table, editing them with a loupe, and scanning them. While I know the work I can do and actually do today far surpasses that from the 80's and 90's, I miss the physical interactions that were a part of this craft. Printing allows me to do a bit of this... even if the prints simply get filed in a cabinet.

bruce

It's interesting how differently we are all hard-wired. In spite of my age pretty much across the board I've embraced a paperless world. Books, files, photos... I think much of my preference is due to the ease of finding things via electronic search. Another is that we have moved our household multiple times and it's that much less stuff to have to deal with. I'm one of the few people in our church congregation(young or old) who doesn't have an old school Bible. Though I have to admit I feel self conscious when following along with scripture on my phone.

When I do need to print metal or canvas prints it's a hassle since the local print shop that I used for years went out of business. I can no longer have proofs conveniently printed locally before ordering. It's not a big deal since most of what I need to print are older images that I already have dialed in with the vendor. But annoying none the less.

But what I'm really looking forward to is the replicator like on starship Enterprise. Imagine no dresser/closet. Just generate a new set of clothes every morning.

 

[jtilley]

Hi folks.

I have questions, if you don't mind:

1. Do you home print or store print?
2. If you home print, what do you print on (hardware) and how do you mount?
3. Is home printing worth it financially these days, or is it more hassle than it's worth?
4. I rent my apartment and want to put some photos up but don't what to have holes all over my walls: what mounting and hanging solutions do you recommend? I'm guessing foam board is the lightest option.

Thanks in advance.

1) Both home and store depending on end use
2) I use a Canon Pro 1000. As for mounting, it varies anywhere from magnets to matted in frames
3) It is almost certainly not the cheapest way to realize a print, but that, as others have mentioned, is far from the point of printing at home. The control you have, the variety of papers you can play with, the satisfaction of doing the whole end to end process, the instant (somewhat) gratification of watching it come out of the printer.
4) I don't have much experience with hanging that doesn't involve putting holes in a wall at some point (unless you want to magnet stick them to an existing magnetic surface).

James

 

[EricBowles]

I print my own work on an Epson 4900, and use two outside printers - Zenfolio using MPix labs and Shutterfly.

For my own prints - fine art prints that I sell or print for my own use - I use the Epson 4900 and handle printing myself. The printer uses roll paper and handles sizes up to 17 wide rolls. The catch is I need to print at least every two weeks or less which involves at least an hour of setup, cleaning, test prints, and producing a final print. I proof using 8.5x11 paper - usually Epson Premium Luster. Print cartridges last a long time, but cost $110 each - and there are 10 carts. That's over $1000 worth of ink. I probably have a fixed cost of $500 per year for biweekly prints, my own prints, and ink. I rarely print anything smaller than 8x10. Most prints are 16x24. Anything larger I farm out to a local printer or a friend with a large Epson. I have used BayPhoto for some specialty items. My own Epson printer provides the highest quality prints. More important to me, I can fine tune images immediately without delays of getting reprints. I often make 2-3 prints before I am really happy with the result. I use specialty papers depending on the print.

For event work, I use Zenfolio to share images with clients and handle fulfillment. I upload images that are 3000 pixels on the long side which handles most client needs. My philosophy here is to produce a good, production quality print with a minimal amount of time and fast, professional fulfillment. They handle collecting payments, shipping, client communication and reporting. I approve all orders and substitute fresh edits for larger prints or edits. In general, this keeps prices at a level appropriate for events while minimizing my time. The service and website costs me $375 per year. It's a higher level of service because of my business needs such as custom pricing and the ability to approve all images. This is where my website is hosted. Pricing of prints for personal use is very inexpensive, but I have shipping costs that can add up.

For small prints and calendars, I use Shutterfly. These prints are snapshots or specialty items. It's very economical and easy. The print quality is the lowest of the group, but for snapshots I don't really care. They do provide some storage so it's interesting to see older image from years ago.

 

[bleirer]

The retailers near me that offer photo printing (Walgreens, CVS, Office Depot, etc. ) all use injet printers. None of them use the process that you've described. I'll look for a place that produces c-prints, as I'd love to compare the quality of my prints to those; it sounds intriguing.

That is interesting. Must be new since the many years ago I printed something at a drugstore. Bay Photo has the C prints if you seek it.

Designer Prints | Photographic Prints — Bay Photo Lab

The highest quality silver halide prints made with care on professional photo papers.

bayphoto.com

 

[JoelKlein]

Most of my wall hangers are bigger fine arts. I’m not printing so often.
What we do produce often, is 4x6 & 5x7 for clients

I want to know the cost of home printing Adobe 1998 (or wider) Vs. sending them to WHCC (4x6 & 5x7)
Per print cost. A typical order ranges from 8 to 32 prints.

Second question, would my 4x6 5x7 and occasionally 8x10/12, be a higher quality and visible to the customer vs. WHCC proofs/prints.

Edit:
Print QTY per month is about 100 - 800. Depending if event customers wants to pay for printing. Lately less people want printing…

 

[bleirer]

Most of my wall hangers are bigger fine arts. I’m not printing so often.
What we do produce often, is 4x6 & 5x7 for clients

I want to know the cost of home printing Adobe 1998 (or wider) Vs. sending them to WHCC (4x6 & 5x7)
Per print cost. A typical order ranges from 8 to 32 prints.

Second question, would my 4x6 5x7 and occasionally 8x10/12, be a higher quality and visible to the customer vs. WHCC proofs/prints.

Edit:
Print QTY per month is about 100 - 800. Depending if event customers wants to pay for printing. Lately less people want printing…

Places like WHCC and Bay Photo use a ROES, Remote Order Entry System and also have a studio portal for managing orders. you can still order prints via their websites, but for frequent use you download the app and log in and you can manage orders and multiples in a pretty sophisticated way. To find out your costs just download the app create an account and plug in your sizes and quantities.

 

[JoelKlein]

Places like WHCC and Bay Photo use a ROES, Remote Order Entry System and also have a studio portal for managing orders. you can still order prints via their websites, but for frequent use you download the app and log in and you can manage orders and multiples in a pretty sophisticated way. To find out your costs just download the app create an account and plug in your sizes and quantities.

I know the WHCC minimums & prices.
I want to know, how much a single home print 4x6 is roughly about.

 

[Wes Peterson]

I know the WHCC minimums & prices.
I want to know, how much a single home print 4x6 is roughly about.

Thats a difficult question to answer. Tell you what. But me an entire compliment of ink for my printer and a box of 4X6 paper and Ill print a rainbow until it runs dry so you can do the math lol

 

[David Berry]

I want to know, how much a single home print 4x6 is roughly about.

Joel …

US$1.00 per print would be a good starting point.

I'd base these costs on:

• consumables : both paper & ink
• wastage : ~10%

The cost of your pinter is not included, but I assume that you'd use a professional-grade printer and consumables.

… David

 

[JoelKlein]

Joel …

US$1.00 per print would be a good starting point. I'd base this cost on:

• consumables : both paper & ink
• wastage : ~10%

The cost of your pinter is not included, but I assume that you'd use a professional-grade printer and consumables.

… David

Thanks!
That is fantastic!
And those printers can do Adobe 1998? (Or maybe ProphotoRGB)

 

[David Berry]

Joel, I'm using a Canon PRO-300. Top quality: certainly compatible with almost any paper (I use Canson; not a typo!) or printer/colour profile — but, of course, check and double-check for yourself.

For peace of mind, add ten or twenty per cent to my estimated costs!

… David

 

[EricBowles]

You have my sympathies owning a Epson 4900. Without a doubt, it's the most clog pro printer ever made. I know having owned five. You spend more time cleaning clogs then printing.

There was a part replaced about three years ago - I don't recall the part - not a print head but a pump or seal of some sort that kept air from the print head. It was reported to me as the third part number for that printer - meaning it had been updated twice. Since then it has been pretty good - but it needs to be used regularly. The thing is, I love the prints it makes.

 

[David Berry]

Joel…

I should have mentioned that, so far as printing is concerned, the primary reason for running a second monitor is being able to judge what the print will look like. What is displayed on my BenQ SW272U is essentially the same as the print. The same cannot be said for the MacBook Pro (early 2023; same as Steve's?) that I'm using now.

Warning: in the BenQ range:

• SW = Photographer Display
• PD = Designer Display

… David

 

[aolander]

Thanks!
That is fantastic!
And those printers can do Adobe 1998? (Or maybe ProphotoRGB)

Not ProPhoto.

 

[David Berry]

Nothing beats seeing your photo displayed as a large format, high resolution print.

SM …

Few would disagree; however, what do you think of my 'system' – can it really be called that? – of printing hundreds of images which are:

• stored in boxes (of course, they are not 'lost and forgotten');
• framed (inexpensively by me; thanks Ikea) and set on shelves or even on a wall;
• stuck on what used to be a pinboard wall in my home office (thanks Bostik for that magic blue stuff).

I've standardised the size for all prints: A4, which is neither too big nor too small (in $ as well as mm).

… David