I Need Advice for a Photo Printer Purchase, Please

Leonardo

(wow, the title was poetic...didn't even intend that)

What it says. I am asking for the impossible machine I suppose, due to the compromise of quality I demand and the money I will budget, but hey, let's give it a try. I am admittedly way behind in understanding color printer capabilities and the newest quality standards. I am open for both ink and laser color printers. Get ready to laugh, because here come desired specifications:

- color
- high quality. if you've seen my photos you know I'm serious about photography. a 'snapshot' is scarcely in my vocabulary (yeah, I can be a perfectionist in some areas
- ink? I've been using laser printers so long now that I don't know the current state of inkjet printers. Do the printer heads still dry up and cause problems if you don't use each color/jet frequently? I don't mind paying for a color laser printer if inkjet cartridge replacements are still crazy expensive.
- laser, are there photo quality (pro quality....or at least approaching pro quality) that are affordable for other than a business?

Sorry, but I'm a bit queasy about this. I've seen so many color photos printed from supposedly 'good' photo printers that look like crap. (being obsessive and a perfectionist can be a real drag, I tell you)

OK, now you can really laugh. My wife wants a photoprinter-copier-scanner combo machine for Christmas. Sure, there's only two million different brands and models, all claiming to be the culmination of art itself. Yeah, right. Are there any with exceptional photo printing capability. It's my experience that multi-anything means do it all OK but no single task really well. Am I wrong?

ADDED: Do you have to go professional level with inkjet printers to get models that you just replace individual color refills as needed? Is it still buy the whole kit even if you only need magenta? Same question for laser - individual color toner tanks available for separate colors, or just at the pro ($$$$) level?

bothered

I thought the same about multi units, until I got one. I'd always spent quite a lot on Epson 'photo' printers because I wanted good prints, my last one was £200. Then another print head clogged up and I got a fairly cheap Lexmark all in one (P4350) and was really supprised. The scanner is excellent, the printer is excellent, it has a card reader, it does what it says on the box. Since then the price has plummeted. I could get mine now for £40! I'm sure there are better printers out there and at £40 I don't see how Lexmark are still in business but you may not have to spend a lot to get good results.

Leonardo

at £40 I don't see how Lexmark are still in business

The same as all the other inkjet makers: enormous profits on replacement ink cartridges.

Thanks for your input.

kryyst

I have a Konica/Minolta magicolor laser printer, combined with good photo paper it prints excellent photos, that last a hell of a lot longer then inkjet, they don't bleed and they don't stick when placed under plastic.

But for longterm keepsakes, no printer will do the job of getting the photo's developed, nor will any of them look as good. So if you are a perfectionist get the ones you really want to keep developed.

However as to everything else. Laser all the way. Inkjet printers still have all the problems inkjet printers have always had.

primesuspect

Trust me when I say that your quality standards will not allow laser to figure in to the equation. You need inkjet if you want true photographic prints.

The good news is that inkjet has come a long, long, astronomically long way in quality. I spent a mere $169 on a photo-grade printer almost three years ago, and the photos it produces are absolutely phenomenal. The key is the paper, of course. I use professional matte photo paper that I buy at a camera shop. It makes a world of difference.

That said, I prefer Canon over Epson. Really, there are only three names in pro-quality photo printing, with HP being the third. HP is relatively new to being taken seriously, so I don't have any experience with them.

Any professional quality photo printer has individual ink tanks. Any printer with all colors in one tank is to be avoided.

I can't speak for the quality of multi-function devices, but in my experience, the multifunctions are designed to be just that - decent at all things, but not expert at any one of them. I would guess that you will be compromising something in the way of photo printing if you went the multifunction route.

Leonardo

Thanks, guys. Keep it coming.

getting the photo's developed

Thanks for the advice, but I left pain-in-the-butt film three years ago and will neither go back nor even look back.

Ryder

Canon S2000. Individual ink cartridges (like 6 or 8 of them) with separate photo ink as well. When you run out of 1 color you don't have to buy all of them.

kryyst

Leonardo wrote:

Thanks, guys. Keep it coming. Thanks for the advice, but I left pain-in-the-butt film three years ago and will neither go back nor even look back.

I'm not suggesting getting film developed but getting your digitals developed by a real photo place. Usually they are around $.20-$.25 a print for a normal sized photo.

Thrax

I too prefer Canon to any other manufacturer for photo printing. Let me tell you, even on my old "Consumer" level i900, Canon glossy photo paper and a good image produces <i>astonishingly</i> good photos. Can't even tell the difference from something developed.

primesuspect

Kryyst, those real photo places, they use high end inkjet photo printers.

kryyst

primesuspect wrote:

Kryyst, those real photo places, they use high end inkjet photo printers.

Depends on where you go and which service you use. I'm not talking about the kiosks that print them out for you - they are inkjet, though good quality ones. Or the 1hr service digital prints, same deal. But if you go to a place that sends them away, they turn the digital into a negative and process it as a true photo. No inkjet printing, it's the same quality you'd get if you were having them develop film.

Snarkasm

A year or two ago, I was getting into photography hardcore (got myself a Canon 30D for Christmas), and somebody knew about it and got me an HP C3150 All-In-One printer/scanner/copier. I thought that's a pretty neat device, but I doubt I can use it for my photos. But the person threw some HP photo paper in there as well, and I decided to give it a whirl. The pictures were seriously, SERIOUSLY nice. I'm willing to accept, as I'm only in my 2.5-3rd year, that my degree of perfectionism and my idea of "seriously nice" may differ from yours, but my only point is that the HPs do indeed have quality in the photo printing department. My particular unit has the single-cartridge color problem, but on the bright side, they're only like $12 each.

I can send you a photo print from it, if you like. As others have said, paper's the primary concern, and I'm surprisingly pleased by mine. No need to be concerned about HP in my opinion.

Let me know if you'd like a print!

TheLostSwede

Leo,

It really depends on how many prints you normally do per month or a given timeframe. If youwant serious prints from photographs, and you know you will print 200+ prints a month, look no further than Solid Ink.

http://www.office.xerox.com/printers/color-printers/phaser-8560/enus.html

Now, the reason i know about theese is that i am a former engineer at Xerox and i know what those can do. They print at least as good as the better inkjets mentioned above, but at a much lower price per sheet. I'm not sure how it is these days, but black used to be free for life. Solid Ink does print true CMYK (Cyan, Magenta, Yellow and Black), raw prints, much better than ink. Visit your local Xerox office for demo.

If you have to get a inkjet, i agree that Canon is the best i have seen.

Leonardo

Thanks, Mr. Mac Swede. Those are probably above my budget for this, but it's a very attractive option.

BTW, my wife decided (smartly) that we don't really need the copier and scanner functions. So now I can concentrate on print output quality, price, and reliability.

GHoosdum

Leonardo wrote:

The same as all the other inkjet makers: enormous profits on replacement ink cartridges.

Thanks for your input.

A friend of mine is a chemical engineer at Lexmark, and he completely confirms what you just stated.

primesuspect wrote:

Kryyst, those real photo places, they use high end inkjet photo printers.

You mean those huge machines behind the counter at the photo place are just big inkjet printers? Is it the paper quality that causes the prints from the photo place to not fade like the ones I used to print at home, or was my printer just crappy?

primesuspect

Some of them are dye sublimination, but yes, they are just big commercial inkjets.

TheLostSwede

If quality the only thing, then Dye sub is the way, but each A-size print will cost you 2-3 dollars in consumables.

Leonardo

The Epson R1800 is what I ended up with. The store had the factory supplied prints plus a few printed on the machine by a local professional photographer. I was very impressed. It also had a rebate and was on sale. If I've made a mistake, I can still return it. I've not opened the box yet.

Thelemech

Leonardo wrote:

The Epson R1800 is what I ended up with. The store had the factory supplied prints plus a few printed on the machine by a local professional photographer. I was very impressed. It also had a rebate and was on sale. If I've made a mistake, I can still return it. I've not opened the box yet.

Although I have had trouble with Epson software, I have always found the hardware to be reliable and usually came with more "bang for the buck" then similar printers. This was Windows 98/2000 era for me. Looks like you bought yourself a good machine Leo, and the reviews I have found were positive.
Have fun with your new printer/toy :bigggrin:

Hawk

Sorry I'm late for the discussion Leo,
But, I'll give my 2 cents anyway.
I have used HP All In One Photosmart Series for many yrs now.
After setting up/trying Canons, Epsons, Lexmarks for family & different friends.
I have come to the conclusion that HP's have much less return for repair.
They are much easier to setup and operate. (software & hardware)
I have given my old HP printers & all in ones to family & friends and so far only one has gone back for repair after 6 yrs of use.
You can also get All In One's with multi ink cartridges too.
Which makes it cheaper to replace if your using up one or two colors more often.
Make lab-quality photos, professional reprints and laser-quality documents with HP Vivera inks, and create superior scans and restore damaged photos with HP Real Life technologies.
Here's one of many excellent All In Ones from HP.. HP C6100 All In One

primesuspect

You made a great choice, Leo. We use the epson Ultrachrome inks at our print shop, on a large format printer - and the colors are frankly astounding. You will absolutely be amazed at what you will be printing off of that beast

Leonardo

Hawk - if you look several posts up, you will notice that I've ditched the all-in-one requirement.

Prime - glad to hear it. I looked at example photograph prints at the store, both locally produced and factory, and I was amazed. Home printing has moved by leaps and bounds in the last ten years. Just a few years ago, color anything from a consumer color printer looked so bad. I used to cringe when friends would 'show off' digital photos they had just printed.

Leonardo

We are now printing with the Epson R1800. These are the best photo prints I've seen outside of a professional shop. Simply outstanding. Prime, you were accurate. The colors are amazing. The gradients are nearly perfect and the color fidelity to the original settings in which I took the photos is scarcely believable. Color saturation and sharpness are excellent. I could go on and on.

I'm working presently on portraits and family casual shots. Next is flowers and Alaska landscapes. I need to find photopaper rolls.

I've tried various papers so far. The Epson 5 star papers are the best, followed closely by Kodak's premium.

Thrax

It's important to note that all glossy papers are capable of generally producing the same results on a glossy-loving printer, you just need to know how to manipulate the settings of that printer. For example, on my Canon printer I have to adjust the color settings of the printer output if I want to use Kodak paper. If I don't, I get yellow banding every 3cm all the way down the page. If I insert Canon paper, I get no such results.

I'm just making you aware that the Epson gives the best results because it's designed to play well with the Epson printer. I suggest checking around on google for printer settings for other paper, that's how I learned that less expensive paper can produce equal results, without getting pigeon-holed into brand-matching.