lablover27
Well-known member
Check your PM’s ASAP
Let's talk all things photo printers
- Thread starter DavidT
- Start date
If you would like to post, you'll need to register. Note that if you have a BCG store account, you'll need a new, separate account here (we keep the two sites separate for security purposes).
eaj101
Well-known member
Ostensibly a review of the Epson P900, actually a good overview of photo printing technologies and options:
The Epson P900 – Incredible Versatility - By: Dan Wells - Luminous Landscape
The Epson P900 – Incredible Versatility - By: Dan Wells - Luminous Landscape
luminous-landscape.com
Last edited:
I've had an Epson 4900 for a number of years. It's long in the tooth now, so I will be replacing it in the next couple of years. It's equivalent is the P5000 - a $2000 printer.
I had some minor clogging problems that worsened and took it to Epson for service about 4 years ago. They told me that the problem leading to clogging was the pump - not the print head. Apparently the pump is supposed to create a vacuum that protects the print head from drying out due to exposure to air. The pump was not working well enough and was redesigned or modified so I have the third part number for the pump. It still clogs a little if I don't use it for a couple of weeks, but is quickly cleared. I normally print at least one 8x10 print each week.
The real advantage of having your own printer is immediate feedback and control. If you outsource prints, the quality of the print will vary. Costco, MPix and others do a good job with prints, but the choice is either no adjustments or auto adjustments. With no adjustments, you have printing, shipping and reprint costs which add up if you need a second to third print to create your artistic vision. With your own printer you get immediate turnaround and can reprint at the same time. I normally make 8x10 proof prints to work out any adjustments before making a larger print.
The other big advantage is paper. With outsourced printing, you paper options are limited. Handling it myself, I can try out new papers or use specialty papers when I want. If an image calls for a watercolor look, you can print on a textured paper. My standard paper is Epson Premium Luster 260, but I have boxes of a half dozen papers.
Printing can be expensive when you consider the cost of the printer and ink. I have 10 ink cartridges, and they cost about $100 each. But they last a long time - 2-3 years or more - and can be replaced individually when needed. Producing an individual print has a relatively low incremental cost - cheaper than Costco or similar discount providers. For a true economic evaluation, you need to consider the cost of the printer, ink, test prints, clearing clogs, etc. For an incremental view based on marginal cost, it's just paper and ink. That get's the cost down around $1 per 8x10 - cheaper than other providers.
The other thing that helps me keep down cost is the use of roll paper. I buy 50 and 100 foot rolls 16-17 inches wide depending on the manufacturer. A larger printer like the Epson 7900 or 9900 and successors (P6000, P7000, P8000, P9000, etc.) would handle 24 or 44 in wide rolls. But I have a lot of flexibility with 16 or 17 inch wide rolls. I use a 250 sheet box of precut 8x10 paper which works out pretty well. I sell proof prints when I speak to groups that largely covers the cost of all my 8x10 test prints. The bigger printers that handle 24 inch paper require a lot more space, a dedicated stand, and four people to move them into your home or office. My 4900 took two people and weighs 115 pounds. I have a custom printer table for it.
I still outsource some printing. Printed books are handled by Blurb which provides better production than I can deliver. For client work for events, I use Zenfolio/MPix. They do a good job at handling prints efficiently and at a reasonable cost with fast turnaround. I have some good tools to manage orders and support marketing, and it lets me make better margins than the time it would take to do all that work myself. I do offer custom fine art prints that I hand produce for equestrian events, but the demand is relatively low. Many people are price sensitive for mid to small sized prints - 11x14 or 12 x 18 and smaller. In that scenario, I try to produce the lowest cost print with good quality by using a vendor solution and saving my time.
I highly recommend printing - but it is a discipline that takes time. I might spend an hour working on a fine art print making multiple test prints and proofs. It's not like printing a document on a laser printer. I would get a printer that handles 90% of your prints - and outsource the balance.
Keep in mind that if you print your own photos, you'll probably want a good source for frames and mats. I use www.frameusa.com for standard frames and mats cut to precut sizes.
I had some minor clogging problems that worsened and took it to Epson for service about 4 years ago. They told me that the problem leading to clogging was the pump - not the print head. Apparently the pump is supposed to create a vacuum that protects the print head from drying out due to exposure to air. The pump was not working well enough and was redesigned or modified so I have the third part number for the pump. It still clogs a little if I don't use it for a couple of weeks, but is quickly cleared. I normally print at least one 8x10 print each week.
The real advantage of having your own printer is immediate feedback and control. If you outsource prints, the quality of the print will vary. Costco, MPix and others do a good job with prints, but the choice is either no adjustments or auto adjustments. With no adjustments, you have printing, shipping and reprint costs which add up if you need a second to third print to create your artistic vision. With your own printer you get immediate turnaround and can reprint at the same time. I normally make 8x10 proof prints to work out any adjustments before making a larger print.
The other big advantage is paper. With outsourced printing, you paper options are limited. Handling it myself, I can try out new papers or use specialty papers when I want. If an image calls for a watercolor look, you can print on a textured paper. My standard paper is Epson Premium Luster 260, but I have boxes of a half dozen papers.
Printing can be expensive when you consider the cost of the printer and ink. I have 10 ink cartridges, and they cost about $100 each. But they last a long time - 2-3 years or more - and can be replaced individually when needed. Producing an individual print has a relatively low incremental cost - cheaper than Costco or similar discount providers. For a true economic evaluation, you need to consider the cost of the printer, ink, test prints, clearing clogs, etc. For an incremental view based on marginal cost, it's just paper and ink. That get's the cost down around $1 per 8x10 - cheaper than other providers.
The other thing that helps me keep down cost is the use of roll paper. I buy 50 and 100 foot rolls 16-17 inches wide depending on the manufacturer. A larger printer like the Epson 7900 or 9900 and successors (P6000, P7000, P8000, P9000, etc.) would handle 24 or 44 in wide rolls. But I have a lot of flexibility with 16 or 17 inch wide rolls. I use a 250 sheet box of precut 8x10 paper which works out pretty well. I sell proof prints when I speak to groups that largely covers the cost of all my 8x10 test prints. The bigger printers that handle 24 inch paper require a lot more space, a dedicated stand, and four people to move them into your home or office. My 4900 took two people and weighs 115 pounds. I have a custom printer table for it.
I still outsource some printing. Printed books are handled by Blurb which provides better production than I can deliver. For client work for events, I use Zenfolio/MPix. They do a good job at handling prints efficiently and at a reasonable cost with fast turnaround. I have some good tools to manage orders and support marketing, and it lets me make better margins than the time it would take to do all that work myself. I do offer custom fine art prints that I hand produce for equestrian events, but the demand is relatively low. Many people are price sensitive for mid to small sized prints - 11x14 or 12 x 18 and smaller. In that scenario, I try to produce the lowest cost print with good quality by using a vendor solution and saving my time.
I highly recommend printing - but it is a discipline that takes time. I might spend an hour working on a fine art print making multiple test prints and proofs. It's not like printing a document on a laser printer. I would get a printer that handles 90% of your prints - and outsource the balance.
Keep in mind that if you print your own photos, you'll probably want a good source for frames and mats. I use www.frameusa.com for standard frames and mats cut to precut sizes.
Drbobcameraguy
Active member
Look at precision color for ink and icc profiles. Red river for paper and knowledge. Also Cambridge color for in depth articles about all things printing.
rloeb
Member
I have an Epson 7900, and it has firmly convinced me to never buy any product made by Epson for the rest of my life! I did a lot of my own printing and gallery wrap, and preferred doing it myself because of the control I could exert. In particular, I found that I frequently wanted to slightly change the size of the image for gallery wrap purposes, or blur the edges, or shift the edge colors slightly. The turnaround time with commercial labs was too long for this type of experimentation. Despite taking every possible precaution, the 7900 eventually started dropping out colors and no amount of cleaning could restore it so that I could rely upon it to produce an accurate print. I learned how to take the machine apart, clean various components, flush the lines, etc., but nothing restored this piece of junk to reliable working condition. From my perspective, Epson marketed a product that had fundamental flaws in its design and foisted it on unsuspecting customers. I don't do business with companies that treat their customers like that. I also use every opportunity to broadcast my opinion of Epson and just added another <grin> Your mileage may vary. (My remaining problem is how to get rid of the thing...)
I've had good luck with Canon large format printers - my first was an IPF-6300 that lasted over ten years until Canon's decision not to upgrade the driver to match Apple's new OS killed it. I replaced it with a Pro 4100 with which I'm quite happy. A big advantage for Canon is the availability of (relatively) inexpensive disposable replacement print heads. The IPF-6300 needed new ones at year seven. One of the best parts of having a printer is the ability to make corrections on the fly rather than waiting for prints to be returned by a lab. You do need a calibrated workflow to avoid paper and ink wastage and the learning curve is steep but IMHO well worth the trouble.
Roy
Well-known member
The Canon inkjets are a great choice.
Epson have printers that have refillable ink tanks.
The problem most people have with inkjet printers is that if you dont use them at least once a week the heads dry out.
Glossy photo paper isn't cheap either.
Mostly I get my prints professionally printed.
Except I use a A3 laser printer on plain paper for quick prints...
O
Well-known member
Only an opinion,
Been there done all that, fantastic set up, 8 shades of black and white on dedicated mono printer, top of the range Epson printer $15k, spectacular printing material stock, lots of tech support, it was a blimin nightmare, i could get nearly as good but mostly better cheaper jobs outside plus always having the benefit to the latest technology..and newest paper stocks.
I use my time to travel and take photos, I am a Photographer not a printer or framer.
Yes you may be able to do a better job at home your self as apposed to high volume auto pilot printing establishments.
The outside professional printing house, Not Kinko, or Office works LOL, for me they calibrate and clean before printing my work, the colour matches beautifully, they can use Hahnemuhle water colour rag paper 300 GSM, foils, aluminum - metals laminate etc or latest greatest new materials all at a fraction of the cost. Pluss they can do small to as much as 2 or 3 meter prints brilliantly.
If your printing occasionally for your self and enjoy doing it that's fantastic go for it and enjoy it, lots of people i know love doing it.
Yes a good printer set up properly etc can be fun till a new model printer comes out with more features extra colours etc and your on the merry go round again.
How many pictures can you hang on the wall i was once asked.
Other than the big Epsom printer i sold, i dumped everything else in the OTTO bin, don't want to go there again, i save time money space, avoid obsolecence and above all i am always On Point with the latest technology.
For me Its also about what else you can do with your time and or money.
You have to please your self, do what you want to do, i am only sharing my experience that may not be what other people wish to do, and yes printing can be enjoyable and fun, it shouldn't have to be about cost or efficiency for everyone.............
Yet there are so many good printing houses out there always looking for work............
Craig McGowan
Active member
In an attempt not to repeat what has been already raised by many in this thread, I will add aspects that I have found with printing.
For several years I have used professional printers and often with varying results. I purchased an Epson P906 (a P900 in some regions) printer about 12 months ago. I tend to print in batches and often the printer is not always used weekly. Regularly printing a 'nozzle check' appears to keep the heads and inks in working order.
I see printing as the last step in the photographic continuum. We expend so much time, money and effort capturing an image, then whatever level of post-processing is required to ones liking, for me it feels wrong not to do anything more with the image than perhaps upload to social media. Whereas I have long thoroughly enjoyed viewing printed works of other photographers. Whilst my preference is landscapes and wildlife shooting and viewing those prints, I also enjoy looking at prints of other genres of photography.
My big take-away has been the improved final processing of my image files prior to print. From simple fixes of getting rid of more dust spots (I double checked the file at 100% prior to sending), through to more aesthetically correct darks and their adjusted levels on a particular image. Further, having a printer has immersed me in better media selections and a greater awareness of what works well for one file, may not for the next.
Yes it does come at a cost financially, plus time and space in the cramped area I call my office. But the satisfaction and fulfilment of seeing your hard-gained capture come to life out of a printer never diminishes. The added benefit is that I still use those professional printers where larger than A2 size prints are ordered, but I am more confident of the preparedness of the files I send, my media choice for each particular image and the resultant print that will return.
My final comment here is that I now find myself thinking of what the print would look like when scouting and arranging a composition to shoot. Silly some may say, but forming those thoughts early on, I would suggest can deliver an even better capture and print.
My 'go to' media are matte papers and a pearl paper;
Hahnemühle Smooth Photo Rag
Canson Rag Photographique
Canson Baryta Photographique II
Plus I use an Ilford Smooth Pearl paper for testing and experimentation in printing.
I calibrate my monitor regularly and have ICC profiled my printer for the 3 fine art papers mentioned above.
I would highly recommend printing your own works to anyone that is considering it. Having said that, I have many photographic friends I shoot with who have no interest in printing their works, and this is also perfectly fine.
Good luck and hit the Print button...
For several years I have used professional printers and often with varying results. I purchased an Epson P906 (a P900 in some regions) printer about 12 months ago. I tend to print in batches and often the printer is not always used weekly. Regularly printing a 'nozzle check' appears to keep the heads and inks in working order.
I see printing as the last step in the photographic continuum. We expend so much time, money and effort capturing an image, then whatever level of post-processing is required to ones liking, for me it feels wrong not to do anything more with the image than perhaps upload to social media. Whereas I have long thoroughly enjoyed viewing printed works of other photographers. Whilst my preference is landscapes and wildlife shooting and viewing those prints, I also enjoy looking at prints of other genres of photography.
My big take-away has been the improved final processing of my image files prior to print. From simple fixes of getting rid of more dust spots (I double checked the file at 100% prior to sending), through to more aesthetically correct darks and their adjusted levels on a particular image. Further, having a printer has immersed me in better media selections and a greater awareness of what works well for one file, may not for the next.
Yes it does come at a cost financially, plus time and space in the cramped area I call my office. But the satisfaction and fulfilment of seeing your hard-gained capture come to life out of a printer never diminishes. The added benefit is that I still use those professional printers where larger than A2 size prints are ordered, but I am more confident of the preparedness of the files I send, my media choice for each particular image and the resultant print that will return.
My final comment here is that I now find myself thinking of what the print would look like when scouting and arranging a composition to shoot. Silly some may say, but forming those thoughts early on, I would suggest can deliver an even better capture and print.
My 'go to' media are matte papers and a pearl paper;
Hahnemühle Smooth Photo Rag
Canson Rag Photographique
Canson Baryta Photographique II
Plus I use an Ilford Smooth Pearl paper for testing and experimentation in printing.
I calibrate my monitor regularly and have ICC profiled my printer for the 3 fine art papers mentioned above.
I would highly recommend printing your own works to anyone that is considering it. Having said that, I have many photographic friends I shoot with who have no interest in printing their works, and this is also perfectly fine.
Good luck and hit the Print button...
Anyone have a photographic paper that works well with a laser printer?
Red River
Where do you get it?
I found them online. Which one of their papers do you use. I tried matte (HP) inkjet paper and it smeared in my printer.
jstefely
Member
I have the Canon Pro-1000. I print maybe once a month or when I have a good number of prints to make. I am very happy with the printer. I turn it off when not in use and a I have never had a clogged head.
Yeah I buy direct. They sell sample kits which is what I would suggest you try. Lots and lots of choices!
+1!
Rixpx
Well-known member
I’m still using the Canon Pro 9500 I bought around 10 years ago, so I can’t comment on what’s available today. The Canon makes excellent prints, but has 10 small ink cartridges. Invariably, one cartridge will be empty every time I decide to use the printer. At $15 each, it’s annoying and expensive. Due to its age, I have no local source for the cartridges, so it’s online ordering.
My recommendation is to buy a printer with large refillable ink tanks, as ink is the main cost of printing.
My recommendation is to buy a printer with large refillable ink tanks, as ink is the main cost of printing.
I use an Epson R3000 that I bought in 2009 and it turns out beautiful prints. If the print I need is less than 13 x 19 I print it, if it is larger I sent it out to Bay Photo. I use Red River and Epson paper. I also do a lot of cards, Red River card stock, and it's nice to have the printer for that as I can quickly print out any needed card.
very satisfied with Cartridge America
Can you share a bit more about why you are looking for photo paper on a laser printer? This is an unusual combination.
My wife makes custom greeting cards and uses a laser printer for B&W text on card stock. But she is not printing color photos or color art which would require a different kind of printer. For photos, she has a Canon Pixma Pro 10 and it's a good photo printer. But she is using it to print things like envelope liners to coordinate with her custom cards - and is not using a color laser printer. In that case she is printing on plain printer paper in draft mode to create a light pattern for the card liner paper.
There are all kinds of combinations for different purposes. It's just that yours is a bit unusual and I would not use photo paper with a laser printer without a specific reason.
Calson
Well-known member
When I was producing prints for clients I found that it cost much less to have the prints made by a lab using their commercial printers and photo paper. Longevity overall is much better than with inkjet prints so I would only recommend the latter if printing on fabric/canvas.
The only situation where it might have made sense to invest in a laser printer was when pricing out a wedding album using vellum paper and making 20-24 prints that were 14x20 in size. Only at that size and in that quantity was there any dollar savings and that also meant placing no dollar value on my time.
I make proof prints on a color laserjet printer and it only needs the cartridges replaced periodically. It can sit for weeks with no worries and the only printer with comparable reliability and durability is a dye-sub printer.
The only situation where it might have made sense to invest in a laser printer was when pricing out a wedding album using vellum paper and making 20-24 prints that were 14x20 in size. Only at that size and in that quantity was there any dollar savings and that also meant placing no dollar value on my time.
I make proof prints on a color laserjet printer and it only needs the cartridges replaced periodically. It can sit for weeks with no worries and the only printer with comparable reliability and durability is a dye-sub printer.
eaj101
Well-known member
Not to be discouraging, but almost all gallery-quality photographic printing these days is by inkjets. For those with bad memories of printer reliability (head clogs, etc) from the past the manufacturers have mostly beat them. I've used an Epson P800 for some years now and *never* had a head clog. Ever.
To be a little contentious though, I don't believe it's even possible to replicate the quality possible with your own printing by using a lab. I do multiple prints of sections of an image or the full image before I find a version of exposure and dodging/burning that meets my standards. I don't see how you could possibly to that with a commercial lab. As an analogy, look at Ansel Adams' book 'The Print'. Digital printing is in workflow and intent fundamentally the same as analog.
To be a little contentious though, I don't believe it's even possible to replicate the quality possible with your own printing by using a lab. I do multiple prints of sections of an image or the full image before I find a version of exposure and dodging/burning that meets my standards. I don't see how you could possibly to that with a commercial lab. As an analogy, look at Ansel Adams' book 'The Print'. Digital printing is in workflow and intent fundamentally the same as analog.
Last edited: