Let's talk all things photo printers

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).

Member's gallery
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.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
Whiskeyman said:
I have heard this said and repeated many times. I'm possibly possessed of extremely good luck, but I've not had this issue with my Epson Artisan 1430 Photo Printer. I've let it sit unused for well over a year, and when I turned it on, it went through a cleaning cycle and has been working fine for the last six months of irregular and infrequent printing.
Click to expand...
I also have the Artisan 1430. After a couple of years (2-3) of use it started drying up and no amount of software-based cleaning would unclog the nozzles anymore. It's been a paperweight in my office for the last year or so. I have been contemplating cleaning it up myself. See

What's stopped me doing the cleaning work until now is the fact that I have not needed to print anything recently, and I don't want to have it happen again afterwards due to infrequent use.
 
Member's gallery
Another P800 user here and I have had nozzle clogs but none that didn't clear. I went 2 months between print sessions.
that time.
I've also gotten better results at home and find test prints useful.
 
Member's gallery
First issue is cost. Ink and paper costs will vary depending on printer and paper used. In every case, the cost of ink + paper will be less than the cost of a good commercial print BUT you have to figure in the cost of the printer. If you only print 5 to 10 prints per month, you tie of a lot of capital. Think of the printer as a 3 or 5 year investment. Divide the cost of the printer by the number of prints over your useful life. Add that to ink and paper. You will likely be close or a little more than commercial printing. Advantages are you get the prints instantly, no shipping damage, you have total quality control. Size is the second consideration to me. I went with the Canon P300. SO far, no clogging or other operational issues. I can print up to A3+ (13 x 19 inches) sheet fed and it fits on a desk. The larger format printers need to have a larger place to live. Since I am retired, time to print is not a majot consideration for me but could be important if it takes awaqy from your productive shooting time.
 
Member's gallery
I have been using the Cannon Pixma Pro-100 for 6 years. Never clogged ot had any problems. I normally print 13x19 (A3+) prints. I then take prints to Hobby Lobby and have them matted and framed.
 
Member's gallery
DavidT said:
I am considering buying a printer to print my own photos in house. Currently I order prints online from one of the many print houses and I have been happy with the results as I do some on paper and some on metal. I have a couple of friends that have the Canon Pro1000 and are encouraging me to buy one.

So I figured let's start a thread and talk about pros and cons of printing yourself, the real cost, the different brands and their pros and cons etc.

If you have a printer I would love to hear your thoughts and what you have learned.

Thank You,
David
Click to expand...
Inkjet printers go a great job but require expensive glossy paper and need to be used regularly (weekly) or the clog up.
While not quite as good Laser printers like the HP 400 print a reasonable image on ordinary photo copier paper and dont clog from lack of use.
If you are printing regularly then the Epson Eco inkjets have refillable tanks that reduce the cost significantly.
Size matters to me and I usually print A3 or A2 size - If im printing then I want it to be worth the while .. 🦘
 
Member's gallery
I didn't know A sizes were metric versus A with no number being 8.5x11 inches. I usually print on C size, 17x22 inch paper and leave a wide border rather than cutting a mat. I can drymount and have instant display.
 
Member's gallery
Roy said:
Inkjet printers go a great job but require expensive glossy paper and need to be used regularly (weekly) or the clog up.
While not quite as good Laser printers like the HP 400 print a reasonable image on ordinary photo copier paper and dont clog from lack of use.
If you are printing regularly then the Epson Eco inkjets have refillable tanks that reduce the cost significantly.
Size matters to me and I usually print A3 or A2 size - If im printing then I want it to be worth the while .. 🦘
Click to expand...
I don't know what kind of inkjet printers you use and base your your first statement on, but I am able to satisfactorially print on many different papers with my current and past inkjet printers; glossy, matte, satin, semi-gloss, metallic papers are all good.
 
Member's gallery
Whiskeyman said:
I don't know what kind of inkjet printers you use and base your your first statement on, but I am able to satisfactorially print on many different papers with my current and past inkjet printers; glossy, matte, satin, semi-gloss, metallic papers are all good.
Click to expand...
At least in the case of Epson clogging has essentiaily been banished as of the P800. Reviews call the P900 even better. (Haven't used HP and Canon in too long to have an opinion. I have heard good things about the Canon PRO-1000 as well).
 
Member's gallery
N
Roy said:
Inkjet printers go a great job but require expensive glossy paper and need to be used regularly (weekly) or the clog up.
While not quite as good Laser printers like the HP 400 print a reasonable image on ordinary photo copier paper and dont clog from lack of use.
If you are printing regularly then the Epson Eco inkjets have refillable tanks that reduce the cost significantly.
Size matters to me and I usually print A3 or A2 size - If im printing then I want it to be worth the while .. 🦘
Click to expand...

Not at all my experience with a Canon. I rarely if ever use glossy paper, I print infrequently, and in 10+ years of ownership never had a clogged nozzle.
 
Member's gallery
DavidT said:
I am considering buying a printer to print my own photos in house. Currently I order prints online from one of the many print houses and I have been happy with the results as I do some on paper and some on metal. I have a couple of friends that have the Canon Pro1000 and are encouraging me to buy one.

So I figured let's start a thread and talk about pros and cons of printing yourself, the real cost, the different brands and their pros and cons etc.

If you have a printer I would love to hear your thoughts and what you have learned.

Thank You,
David
Click to expand...
I think the main reason to print is that you love printing. As part of your photographic art/craft. All inkjet printers are capable of beautiful prints if used optimally. My suggestion is to start with a modest but competent model and see if you love printing. An Epson ET8550 comes to mind but many possibilities exist.
 
Member's gallery
Alistair said:
I think the main reason to print is that you love printing. As part of your photographic art/craft. All inkjet printers are capable of beautiful prints if used optimally. My suggestion is to start with a modest but competent model and see if you love printing. An Epson ET8550 comes to mind but many possibilities exist.
Click to expand...
This is an older post. I bought a Canon Prograf 1000
 
Member's gallery
EricBowles said:
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.
Click to expand...
Eric, I am not a professional photographer, so I don’t expect for the near term that I will be printing more than a few 8X10’s per month. I currently have an HP laser printer as the only printer in the house and was trying to avoid buying an inkjet printer due to the issues mentioned above. Thus, looking for a short to medium term solution until/if I’m able to sell my services or images to pay for more stuff. For larger prints i will probably go to a lab for printing. I’m still learning…
 
Member's gallery
Calson said:
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.
Click to expand...
Carlson,
I understand. If I were starting from scratch or had budget at the moment for another printer I would do that. In the meantime looking for a passable solution without wasting time and money on an external lab…yet. Along time ago (1976ish) I did a few friends’ weddings and used Meisel in Atlanta as the lab. They did great work but don’t know if they are even in business anymore.
 
Member's gallery
Roy said:
Inkjet printers go a great job but require expensive glossy paper and need to be used regularly (weekly) or the clog up.
While not quite as good Laser printers like the HP 400 print a reasonable image on ordinary photo copier paper and dont clog from lack of use.
If you are printing regularly then the Epson Eco inkjets have refillable tanks that reduce the cost significantly.
Size matters to me and I usually print A3 or A2 size - If im printing then I want it to be worth the while .. 🦘
Click to expand...
Actually inkjet printers can use a wide range of papers. I run everything from copy paper to textured fiber and velvet papers depending on my needs. There are settings in your print software and printer to manage different paper types.

Regular use can be important. My main printer is an Epson 4900. That printer is prone to clogs if not used regularly - meaning every 2-3 weeks. But clogs are usually cleared easily with the instructions to the printer (test sheets and normal cleaning). I also have a Canon Pixma Pro that is used less regularly, and it has never had any clogging.

Refillable ink has pros and cons. Ink can be very expensive. Cleaning involves wasting a little ink, so its part of the cost. If you choose to use third party ink, refillable cartridges, or other third party solutions, you need to use caution. I would not use third party ink in my Epson 4900. It makes great prints using genuine Epson ink cartridges. But if I were to use third party inks, it would probably be through a company like Cone Inks. Jon Cone has been making his own inks for 20 years and can guaranty both ink quality and compatibility. (https://shop.inkjetmall.com/about-conecolor-pro-inks)

One thing to note about third party inks is the shelf life may be shorter than OEM inks. For example, Cone inks are recommended to be used within 6-12 months after opening, and even then they suggest shaking the ink cartridges every three weeks or so.

There are also a wide range of outsourced printing options. At the low end, you have snapshot quality through local drug stores or retailers. These vendors produced convenient, low quality prints. Working up the chain, you have prints through Costco and Walmart/SamsClub. Online Vendors like Shutterfly provide inexpensive production prints, but quality is highly variable. Better vendors are used to provide prints for commercial photographers - and those vendors include Zenfolio, White House Color, Bay Photo, and more. I use Zenfolio/White House Color for print fulfillment of my equestrian work. At the top end you have vendors like Cone Editions who produce hand crafted prints, There are even vendors specializing in competition prints for PPA and other organizations. These high end printers are actually pretty reasonably priced. I'd encourage you to have your best image printed by one of these printers including photo editing as needed. It's a good way to see what their prints look like and set a bar for your own work.
 
Member's gallery
I bought a Canon Pro 1000 a couple of years ago and for the first few months, printed a number of my images to hang on my walls. My wife was having just as much fun as I was, I think. I have since printed very sporadically, mainly (probably) because I bought a BMW GS motorcycle. In the past six months, as the weather turned to winter, I got back into photography again, picking up a new body and some glass. A couple of weeks ago, I fired up the Canon which had sat idle for over a year and ran a test print: no evident clogs. I have a nice collection of about 7-8 papers in various sizes, along with some leftover sample packs. Most of my papers are RR, Hahnemuhle, Canson and I have the profiles already loaded. (I have previously sent a few images out to Pictorem, and will likely continue for more specialty printing there or Bay Photo, or elsewhere.) The only outstanding obstacle now is relearning my workflow, complicated somewhat by my current efforts to clean up my image libraries (LR, LRC, Apple Photo, Aperture…), possibly introducing Photo Mechanic into the flow, and getting into the mindset. It’s a wonderful feeling, as others have noted, seeing that image feed out of the printer. Hopefully the impending riding weather won’t interfere with it all!
 
Member's gallery
Jadiehl said:
Eric, I am not a professional photographer, so I don’t expect for the near term that I will be printing more than a few 8X10’s per month. I currently have an HP laser printer as the only printer in the house and was trying to avoid buying an inkjet printer due to the issues mentioned above. Thus, looking for a short to medium term solution until/if I’m able to sell my services or images to pay for more stuff. For larger prints i will probably go to a lab for printing. I’m still learning…
Click to expand...
I would not spend money on photo paper to feed through an HP laser printer. It's a perfectly good laser printer for documents - but not photos. It's not going to produce a quality 8x10. Instead you can use Shutterfly, Zenfolio, or similar services and get reasonable quality prints for a reasonable price. For low volume, you can get a decent photo printer for $175-400 and it will actually produce a usable photo print. Just stick with major brands - HP, Canon, or Epson.

There is nothing wrong with using a third party printer. In fact, most people should only buy a printer large enough for 80-90% of their work. Printers for your largest prints get a lot more expensive - especially ink costs. There are plenty of professionals that have gotten out of the printing business and use third parties for all of their client work. Think in terms of placing one order a month so you can consolidate prints and keep shipping costs down. Then make sure you use your prints - framing them, giving them as gifts, or mounting them as note cards.

I would not count on selling prints to make money. People buy remarkably few prints - and the people you know are probably photographers rather than print buyers. It can be done, but takes a lot of time and effort on marketing and promotion. Unless you want to spend more time marketing than making photos, stick with the part of photography that's fun.
 
Last edited:
Member's gallery
I used to have problems going back to the Epson 2880 and 3880, but the P800 has fixed that. I print in flurries, with weeks between flurries. I leave the power on and have yet to have a clog. The P800 has been superseded by the P900 with is reported to be even better.
 
Member's gallery
EricBowles said:
I would not spend money on photo paper to feed through an HP laser printer. It's a perfectly good laser printer for documents - but not photos. It's not going to produce a quality 8x10. Instead you can use Shutterfly, Zenfolio, or similar services and get reasonable quality prints for a reasonable price. For low volume, you can get a decent photo printer for $175-400 and it will actually produce a usable photo print. Just stick with major brands - HP, Canon, or Epson.

There is nothing wrong with using a third party printer. In fact, most people should only buy a printer large enough for 80-90% of their work. Printers for your largest prints get a lot more expensive - especially ink costs. There are plenty of professionals that have gotten out of the printing business and use third parties for all of their client work. Think in terms of placing one order a month so you can consolidate prints and keep shipping costs down. Then make sure you use your prints - framing them, giving them as gifts, or mounting them as note cards.

I would not count on selling prints to make money. People buy remarkably few prints - and the people you know are probably photographers rather than print buyers. It can be done, but takes a lot of time and effort on marketing and promotion. Unless you want to spend more time marketing than making photos, stick with the part of photography that's fun.
Click to expand...
Thanks, Eric. These are some very good pieces of advice. You have given me some things to think about…much appreciated.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top