Photo printer question - Best bang for the buck?

[Dumpster 0]

Looking to buy a printer for the house - Want to be able to do my regular printing plus photos, up to 8x10. What is the best bang for the buck nowadays?

Easy Does It

[Laszloimage 0]

I use the Epson R-1800. This one can print up to 13x19 borderless, or 13"wide roll paper. It's also very fast. It has a "smaller brother" the R-800 which uses the exact same kind of ink (8 different colors) and printing head except the max paper size is 8.5"x11". Canon and HP printers are very good too, but the Epson a bit better.
-Laszlo-

[BlueSBDeath 2]

I use a very nice HP Photosmart 8450.

It does a great job, both for photos and normal document print work.

Look around and price replacement ink for some models you are interested in, and photo quality paper, to see if it will fit your needs.

Stay safe,

Arvel

BSBD...........Its all about Respect,

USPA#-7062, FB-2197, Outlaw 499

[Zee 0]

I have a Canon MP600 for both pictures and regular document work. It has a 5 cartridge system ($15 each) and it produces very nice prints - I use Canon paper with it and the results are pretty impressive. It's not that expensive and it has a built in scanner.

The only problem I've had is that it sometimes doesn't recognize a new print cartridge and gives you an error. The only way to clear it is to install a new one.....

Action©Sports

[pilotdave 0]

I also have the Epson R-1800 and would highly recommend the R-800 (smaller version) or the 1800 if you wanna go big every once in a while.

I've had a few HP printers before this one, and they were all ok. When I decided to get a real photo printer (my old HP could do photos but it wasn't really meant for that), I did a bunch of research and learned that Epson really has the egde in certain areas, such as long-life prints.

I use a cheap HP photo printer at the DZ for direct printing from memory cards. The prints look good, but they'll be horribly faded within 6 months if they're hung on a wall. I've seen a print from an Epson 2200 (uses similar ink to the 1800/800) that was left in direct sunlight for years without fading.

For glossy prints, the 800/1800 lays down a clear coat on top of the print. That just evens the glossiness, so different parts of the print with different amounts of ink don't look shinier than other parts. It also makes the prints water resistant. Ever got a drop of water on a regular inkjet print? Instantly ruined. Water can be wiped right off a print from this thing.

Anyway, read reviews and look at prices, but I'm VERY happy with my 1800.

Oh, the 1800 works fine for normal everyday printing too.

Dave

[Cashmanimal 0]

Quote

I use the Epson R-1800. This one can print up to 13x19 borderless, or 13"wide roll paper. It's also very fast. It has a "smaller brother" the R-800 which uses the exact same kind of ink (8 different colors) and printing head except the max paper size is 8.5"x11". Canon and HP printers are very good too, but the Epson a bit better.
-Laszlo-

I love my R-1800. The only problem I have had with it was recently I was sent an incorrect cartridge (looked exactly the same) and when the printer doesn't have all it's cartridges, it refuses to work. I was missing the light cyan cartridge, and it still wouldn't let me print even grayscale stuff. Not a big deal... it was just an annoyance.

Oh, and the (give or take) $120 to replace all the cartridges can be a bit irritating as well.

It's all fun and until someone loses an eye... then it's just a game to find the eye

[hjumper33 0]

I had a photoprinter until I realized that it was waaaaay cheaper to just send in the digital photos to walmart or walgreens. Youll have them back in an hour, usually less, and the quality is perfect.

[Laszloimage 0]

I don't think Walmart, Walgreens, or any other of these places can produce a quality print as I (not only me but anyone else too) can make on the Epson R-1800 or any other pro inkjet printer at home. The reason is because they just have no clue about photo printing.These places produce quantity vs. quality. Next time just ask any of the empolyes about ICC profile, color gamut, or differences between papers...
Other wise you're right it's not cheap to print photos at home or at the DZ... that's why I charge for it.
$15 for an 8"x10"
-Laszlo-

[pilotdave 0]

Yeah, reviews of online print shops (including walmart, etc) are pretty amazing... same equipment, same paper, MUCH different quality when compared side by side. But I wouldn't want to print a big stack of 4x6s on my R1800...

I did compare the same picture printed by a high-quality online photo lab (EZ prints) and my R1800. Both were 4x6s. Can't tell the difference without a magnifying glass, but the pro print is noticeably better under a magnifying glass. Not that it matters!

But I don't think the printer quality and print cost has anything to do with how much you can charge for prints... that has much more to do with the quality of the picture itself. That's why I'm still giving away framed 8.5x11 prints for free.
Dave

[PharmerPhil 0]

Quote

...walmart or walgreens...the quality is perfect.

Wow. I usually gag when I see the prints these places charge for. What the hell sort of Wal-whatevers do you have in YOUR area?

P.S. Lazlo, you are way too cheap. Your photos are worth more, and people WILL pay more.

[Laszloimage 0]

Phil,
Thank you very much for the compliment.
We have to be realistic though, not everybody is like us and can appreciate the value of a photograph.
Unfortunately most people only see the price diffrence between $4-5 at Walmart or $15 at the DZ.
Lately I've been turned down a lot because of the price of an 8x10 print. Top of that these people were FIRST TIME TANDEMS! The only physical evidence and memory of their jump (I try to sell landing shots for those who don't buy video) and they still think $17 (I pay $2 per pic to the DZ) for an 8x10 is way too expensive.

The attached picture just another "No Sale" example.
Pretty nice shot of an first time jumper ...it was too expensive. This photo is his only "evidece" as well.

In the other hand I'm not crying, I accepted that some people just can't afford to spend an extra $17 after they spent $189 on their TM jump. Or some just really don't appreciate the value of a picture or any kind of art. If I want to make more money I need to sell my photos out side of skydiving. I guess we all know that...
-Laszlo-

Sorry about the off topic

[hjumper33 0]

Ive printed a few 8x10s at walgreens and been really happy with the results. If I am doing a lot of editing to a photo, ill print out a few different 4x6 prints to check quality of color and resolution, for $0.19 I can afford some practice. After owning a photo printer and going through a ton of money in start up costs, ink, and photo paper, I realized I could have printed out 50x more photos for way less cost. I suppose it depends what you want, and what kind of quality you need. 10.1 MP full resolution looks damn good on an 8x10 for $2.99. Im sure there are people that turn out AMAZING prints on their photo printers, just ask yourself if you have the time, ability, and money to do that, I personally did not.

[Dumpster 0]

So - Casual photo printing = Walgreens
Serious stuff = Buy a printer?

Easy Does It

[pilotdave 0]

I wouldn't say that at all. There are places to have "serious stuff" printed, like http://www.whcc.com/. That's where a lot of pros send their work to be printed.

I think a photo printer is best for convenience for small numbers of prints. And it gives you the most control. But definitely not the best quality available or the most print options.

Dave