BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: Best Photographic Equipment to Buy : Digital Cameras and Accessories : Digital Photo Printers & Supplies

Photography Question 
Charlyce Altom
 

Photo Printers


I'd love to have a photo printer, but don't know where to start, so I thought I'd go to my new-found friends at BetterPhoto and ask for your advice.

My daughter and I have a very enjoyable small business doing outdoor family pix, children's candids, family reunions, a few weddings, etc. We let the photo lab do the printing and enlargements that people request, but I'd like to dip my toe into some of the editing for photos of my family, landscapes, etc.

I'm not happy with most of the prints I get from my HP all-in-one. I'd like the prints to last, so do I need to have a printer that uses special archival inks and papers? Thanks for your help.

Here is what I have to work with: a 3 megapixel Olympus digital, a nice Minolta SLR--I order the prints on CD when I have my film processed, and Photoshop Elements 2--having fun learning this!

If you have suggestions, please include the brand, model number and price. Thanks.


To love this question, log in above
10/6/2003 9:00:23 AM

 
Tony Sweet
TonySweet.com
Tony's Photo Courses:
2-Week Short Course: A Quick Start to Adding More 'Pop' to Your Images
  Hi Charlyce:

Hands down! My recommendation is the Epson 2200 for about $700. It may sound like a good piece of change, but if it's your business, no matter how small, quality, speed, ease of use, and maintenace should be of paramount importance. This printer has it all. Every pro I know has one.

Good luck!


To love this comment, log in above
10/6/2003 10:41:58 AM

 
Piper Lehman
BetterPhoto Member Since: 7/20/2001
  Tony, for those of us who can't afford to spend $700 on a printer right now, what Epson or other brand do you recommend? How about a list of printers in order of their 'greatness'!

Would you stick with Epson all the way, or do you think HP has one in there somewhere? I like the roll-paper feature of the 2200, but it's not my number one priority. Getting a professional color print is #1.


To love this comment, log in above
10/7/2003 9:21:42 AM

 
Tony Sweet
TonySweet.com
Tony's Photo Courses:
2-Week Short Course: A Quick Start to Adding More 'Pop' to Your Images
  Hi Piper,

A professional level printer, although quite inexpensive by conventional standards, costs some bucks to most people. The 2200 is what every pro, that I know of, uses.

You can also look for refurbished 1270 and 1280 Epson printers, which are outstanding. Try calling Epson to find out where refurbs are available.

Good luck!


To love this comment, log in above
10/7/2003 11:38:28 AM

 
Mary Binford
BetterPhoto Member Since: 9/11/2003
  I have been using an Epson 890 for about 3 years. I think that the price has come down to about $300. It does beautiful borderless photos. It is the same as an Epson 1280 except that the max width is 8 1/2. It can accomodate roll paper, though I have not found a good way to uncurl this paper after printing. I buy 4x6, 5x7 and 8x10 premium glossy photo paper from Epson online. There shipping is a flat $1.50 and there is no state sales tax to my area. Sorry if this sounds like a commercial, but I print many photos and like this printer. Another thought is that the key to good prints is the right paper that matches one of your driver settings. Hope this helps.


To love this comment, log in above
10/16/2003 6:41:04 AM

 
Holly Higbee-Jansen
BetterPhoto Member Since: 7/10/2003
  I noticed the Epson 2200 only makes prints 13" x 44". What if you want to go bigger than the 13" size? Do you send out the work then? What lab do you recommend?


To love this comment, log in above
10/16/2003 6:55:46 AM

 
Shirley D. Cross-Taylor
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/7/2001
Contact Shirley
Shirley's Gallery
  I agree with Tony. If you can swing it at all, go with the Epson 2200. I'm so glad I did. The inks are lightfast up to 100 years, and you can purchase papers other than Epson, that work beautifully with this printer, and I've found the Epson ink cartridges at a great price online at www.galleryprint.com. I do a lot of fine art photography which is shown in galleries... this printer is fantastic.


To love this comment, log in above
10/16/2003 1:36:20 PM

 
Gregg Vieregge   Ink Jet lays on the surface of a piece of paper. Burn your images to a CD and go to a local lab, Target, or a pro lab and use emulsion paper that goes thru regular developing chemistry.

Protect your images with Shurgard lacquer spray by McDonalds. Ink is expensive on ink jet printers and the makers know that. You'll never re-coupe your investment in an expensive ink jet. Should you insist on a printer for your home use, consider the Kodak 8500. It uses a subligmation process that make a print that is virtually impossible to tear in half and the detail and color is fantastic ($1,000 and $1.75 average cost per 8X10 sheet).

Good Luck!


To love this comment, log in above
10/16/2003 3:00:14 PM

 
Gregg Vieregge   Ink Jet lays on the surface of a piece of paper. Burn your images to a CD and go to a local lab, Target, or a pro lab and use emulsion paper that goes thru regular developing chemistry.
Protect your images with Shurgard lacquer spray by McDonalds. Ink is expensive on ink jet printers and the makers know that. You'll never re-coupe your investment in an expensive ink jet. Should you insist on a printer for your home use, consider the Kodak 8500. It uses a subligmation process that make a print that is virtually impossible to tear in half and the detail and color is fantastic. ($1,000 and $1.75 average cost per 8X10 sheet)

Good Luck


To love this comment, log in above
10/16/2003 3:00:20 PM

 
Alan Kirkpatrick   Without trying to plug a specific seller: There are some mailorder outfits like mwave.com that sell the Epson 2200 for $589, and Epson 1280 for $380.


To love this comment, log in above
10/16/2003 4:28:20 PM

 
Peter A. Gonzalez   Hello:

Hopefully this information is found useful. I discussed questions and concerns about prints and printers with an Epson representative. I was told, that, the Epson inkjet 820 and the older 1270 have the same "guts" inside.

The down side is this printer can only print 8x10 size. However, it sells for approximately 80 dollars.

While I don't have the experience others have that have addressed this question, I've had nothing but great pics and results.


To love this comment, log in above
10/16/2003 5:32:48 PM

 
Betty Fleet   For those looking for "low-end" quality, I have been delighted with the performance of my Epson C82, especially using Epson double-sided Matte paper. It's far ahead of any other inkjet that I have owned. I am strictly an amateur, printing 8x10's, and smaller,ranging from closeups to landscapes. All print beautifully. I use a Pentax 330GS camera - nothing fancy.


To love this comment, log in above
10/21/2003 5:33:30 AM

 
Michael McCullough   Canon has a new model the 950 that looks good by the review I read in Shutterbug magazine also its quite resonable!!!


To love this comment, log in above
10/21/2003 9:15:40 AM

 
Charlyce Altom   Thanks, friends! It's great to know I have such a resource. I'm looking into all the printers mentioned, as well as the great suggestion to learn how to save to CD and have a lab do the printing. I'll keep you updated on my progress--maybe someone else can learn from my experiences. I really do appreciate you taking the time to respond to my question.


To love this comment, log in above
10/22/2003 9:35:43 AM

 
Ron DenHollander   I have an Epson 825 Stylus Photo paid $119.00 Canadian, has a 5780 X 720 resolution, makes excellent prints, has slot for all types (includes adaptor) of cards so you can use it without a computer, has slot for 2" LCD monitor, have printed off lots of pictures and amazed by quality. Also have a Canon unit that cost $400.00, the epson beats it hands down.


To love this comment, log in above
11/21/2003 6:42:10 PM

 
James Gregus   I have been looking at the new Canon printers. Canon has a new printer called i9100 that does a great job of printing 13x44" photo's. I talked to the factory rep yesterday and he said that thier paper last as long as the Epson. This printer cost around $500.00. It also prints alot faster than the others. And the ink is less money. So this is one to think about.


To love this comment, log in above
11/21/2003 10:35:38 PM

 
Ron DenHollander   I have the canon that takes the individual tanks, 6, and the epson 2 tank 6 colour system, each canon tank is 21.95, and the epson is 29.95 for the colour, 36.95 for black and white, even though I can change the tanks in the canon individually the cost is much cheaper for the epson 66.00 vs 120.00+


To love this comment, log in above
11/22/2003 5:41:28 AM

 
Gene    I totally agree with Gregg's anwser....Go to a pro lab and save yourself all the hassles of Color managment. I use a Pro Lab TPIPHOTO.COM
Download there FREE software, you just upload the images you want printed to there server you can crop and rotate and they ship back within 24 hrs.
PS the cost of an inkjet printer is nothing compaired to the cost of the inks and borderless 8x 10s use a ton of ink.Hope this helps Gene


To love this comment, log in above
11/23/2003 10:20:43 AM

 
Shirley D. Cross-Taylor
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/7/2001
Contact Shirley
Shirley's Gallery
  There is nothing like being in control of your own prints...unlike having a lab do them. Also, the Epson 2200 does prints up to borderless 13X44 inches. I get my inks thru www.galleryprint.com for $10.70 each cartridge. Yes, they're expensive, but no as much as buying thru Epson. They also sell the wonderful Legion photo papers for a great price.


To love this comment, log in above
11/23/2003 3:14:35 PM

 
Tony Sweet
TonySweet.com
Tony's Photo Courses:
2-Week Short Course: A Quick Start to Adding More 'Pop' to Your Images
  You may do better using http://lexjet.com for ink carts.


To love this comment, log in above
11/23/2003 4:16:03 PM

 
Shirley D. Cross-Taylor
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/7/2001
Contact Shirley
Shirley's Gallery
  Thank you, Tony. That's the best price I've seen on the Epson ink cartridges.


To love this comment, log in above
11/24/2003 12:54:15 PM

 
John Sandstedt
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/8/2001
  It ain't the printer - it ain't the paper. If you read the reviews in various photo magazines, several things become apparent. Manufacturers are making their profits from the ink and paper, primarily, and all of them have a variety of units [albeit at various prices] that could "fill your bill."

But - it's really the paper that tells the tale in my experience. I have a Canon S800 [obsolete, immediately, after it's first use - as you'd expect from a computer or peripheral] but - it's great with Canon paper. But, I've recently found Ilford as an option, in various forms, primarily as a response to a question to this column.

Remember, however, it ain't the printer or the paper. It's the image and the photographer. Digital is a format, not a panacea!!! And, Photoshop can't salvage a bad picture!


To love this comment, log in above
11/25/2003 3:57:09 PM

 
Reid S. Mason   Hey, I don't know if you've already purchased a printer, but Costco.com has the Epson 2200 for $579! That's a screamin' deal!


To love this comment, log in above
1/9/2004 8:29:22 PM

 
Sheldon Lazovsky   I have the Epson 2200 as well, and I love it. But I would agree with John S. the the paper makes a world of difference. I use Ilford's Gallerie Smooth Pearl paper. It has a great weight and feel, and it absorbs the ink, rather than letting the ink sit on the paper. I can hold a just printed photo under running water, and the ink won't run or smear. You will get these results with any printe, too. ( I also print with an HP 'all in one' printer). People just ca't believe I'm showing them a digital print. Try it, you'll like it!


To love this comment, log in above
2/15/2004 7:22:27 PM

 
Justin    I recently bought a Canon i865 photo printer and have been *extremely* impressed with the results.
The printer was $330 Australian, so about $200 US, cheap ink costs, and full page borderless colour printing.
With a good source image and quality photo paper, it takes a better eye than mine to distinguish this printers prints from developed prints.

I *highly* recommend it.


To love this comment, log in above
2/23/2004 8:09:05 PM

 
Loren Roque   I have an Epson R300 printer, which is certainly smaller than what you would be using for your business. But Epson has their printing technology DOWN, and I am certain an Epson 2200 or 4000 would be a good investment. One option though.....Costco does a booming business with professional photographers. I have TIFF files printed on their Noritsu QSS2901 printer (on FujiColor Crystal Archive paper) and they are beautiful......real photographs in every respect! And a 12"x18" or 11"x14" is $2.99 each, 8"x12" is $1.99.
Put a decent mark up on those prices and you should be doing well.
You can get the digital printer profiles at www.drycreekphoto.com, and what you see (on a properly calibrated moniter) is what the Noritsu will print.

Loren Roque


To love this comment, log in above
3/9/2004 12:51:32 PM

 
RoxAnne E. Franklin   I just ordered Ilford Pearl paper, sizes 11 x 17 and 8 1/2 x11. What paper settings do you all use on the Epson 2200 when using this paper? Premium Luster, Enhanced Matte? I thought I better ask so I dont waste any paper experimenting.
Thanks for your help


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 10:07:48 AM

 
John Sandstedt
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/8/2001
  The paper will arrive in a box that includes Ilford's recommendations. This is a starting point, you'll have top experiment. So what, it's not the cost of the paper, it's the cost of the ink!


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 10:56:09 AM

 
Andy Middleton   Hi I was facing the same dilemma..which printer to buy.Looked around and could not find a printer that delivered better quality than the epson stylus 950.Not A3 but covers 90% of what I need for 300$.
Got it home , started it up and bingo..beautiful color,amazing reproduction of tones on epson photo glossy paper.
I have not seen anyone mention this printer but maybe you want to check it out....am


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 1:40:14 PM

 

BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/28/2003
  I gotta totally disagree with Gregg V.

I have an Epson 2200 and I am happy to pay for the ink and paper. Do you know that I have saved thousands already by not having to go to my pro lab.

As an example, my pro lab charges $6.50 for a nice hand-made 5x7 color print.

Guess how much I can do it for...less than $1. And guess how many I had to do last week to show a client coming over the next day to view some stuff. I had to print about 30 images. All different sizes and shapes.

Had I had to go to a lab, not only would I be limited to 4x6, 4x5, or 5x7, or 8x10, but I would have had to pay alot of costs. And, I would have had to tell my client to schedule for later on that week. With my Epson 2200, I just printed out everything that night and was ready in the morning to present some fresh images.

Lets say I take those same 30 to a lab, that would have cost me 30x$6.50=$195.

I did it for about $20. And the client was very impressed with my work and although I don't know if I got the job yet, they have called to confirm other details and information.

Also, with the printer, I can print a list of thumbnails on a 8 1/2 x 11 several sheets of Semi-Gloss photo paper. The thumbs are small photos from the portfolio they saw. I always do this to give them something to walk away with. It seems to work pretty well.

Anyway, I can't disagree with you more about the cost. I save tons using this printer and I have freedom to crop, change color, etc. at will.

I agree that the final final product I produce will be from the lab and that that is the product that is ultimately for the client. But, the printer is a fantastic money saver on many levels.

I even gave a client some prints from it because I knew they didn't want to buy reprints from me. So, I did some sepia tones, etc (about 10) and really impressed them. They wound up placing a $600 reprint order with me because of what I showed them could be done with the regular old proofs they were holding.

Some times clients can't see past what they are looking at. So, it can be used to show them what a proof can turn into.

This printer produces fantastic results and hands-down is the ultimate.

It is worth every last penny I spend on it. And is not a waste.

I also plan to use it soon as a guide to show to my lab for certain situations.

Jerry


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 4:43:08 PM

 
John Sandstedt
BetterPhoto Member Since: 8/8/2001
  Jerry -
In the grand scheme of this discussion, what have you said? I'm glad you saved money, but someone asked for advice about printers and paper.


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 5:37:41 PM

 
Gene    Jerry: I don't know what lab your using@6.50 for a 5x7...BUT my lab only charges me $1.65 and the prints coming back are Drop Dead Georgious.. Guaranteed 200 yrs by Kodak, Your ink supplier guarantee that??? They might be out of business in 200 days..I don't know HOW MUCH TIME you had in producing those prints...But I upload the images to my lab (takes about 5 MIN.)and I'm off making money doing other things. I let the lab worry about making sure the color and density are correct. There the ones with $100K invested in the equiptment. and 99% of the time they ship back within 24hrs...Why even bother trying to produce you own...Gene


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 6:00:02 PM

 

BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/28/2003
  Thanks John. I think I got caught up.

Gene, I can get 5x7 prints for .99, but they are machine prints and not suitable for my clients.

Jerry


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 7:31:30 PM

 
Gregg Vieregge   Let's take a deep breath here everyone.

Ink jet will look different 12 months down the road. Fading will happen. A Pro lab, (not an one hour) will look the same for many years to come. Pro labs are printing on equipment that cost $250,000+. How does a $200 ink jet compare to this? Pro labs charge on average of $.50 for a 4x5 or 4x6, $1.10 for a 5x7 and $2.20 for a 8x10 and $5.50 for a 11x14. There equipment is fully color corrected daily for quality. Spray a McDonald lacquer spray on the print and you can run the print under water with no damage. Someone tell me how to beat this with ink jet.


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 7:54:30 PM

 
Gregg Vieregge   Hey, why are you giving clients anything to view but a CD slideshow which can not be stopped to copy. CD's are about $.20 at Office Max and clients can open them up and see a big image on their monitor. Go to www.autofx.com and get a great software program for under $


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 8:03:37 PM

 

BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/28/2003
  Gregg V.,

I'm very slowly moving to that. But, I just haven't yet. You're right about the lab. I'm not suggesting the printer is a replacement for the lab. It just helps me get proofs and presentations together at a small fraction of the cost of using a lab. And, I can be more flexible and change things around on my own.

My friends have a point, that if I'd just get my marketing right the first time with a great portfolio that will last for years, I shouldn't need to change things constantly. But, I think I'm just too hyper for that. I always have new ideas and I like change.

I'm not at the CD slide show level yet, although I am looking into it.

Jerry


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 9:00:39 PM

 
Shirley D. Cross-Taylor
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/7/2001
Contact Shirley
Shirley's Gallery
  Gregg, you must not be familiar with the Epson 2200. The inks will not fade for 75-100 years, not in 12 months. I make beautiful gallery-quality prints with mine, which I sell on a regular basis.


To love this comment, log in above
3/11/2004 9:16:19 PM

 
Gene    Jerry: I don't understand where your coming from...YOU STATED, (I can get 5x7 prints for .99, but they are machine prints and not suitable for my clients.)
But in your previous post you said you had to pay $6.50 for your 5x7's ?? I said my lab produces Digital prints for $1.65 they also produce 5x7 proofs for $.75 ..There is no such thing as machine print quality or custom quality in the Digital Arena today, thats gone bye the way of optical printing. The only difference in todays world is the amount of time your lab spends correcting your files. There all produced on $200K dollar laser printers and color correcting software that costs $8000.00 per computer. How can you say inkjet prints produced on a $400.00 inkjet printer and a $600.00 photoshop program can even come close in comparison.
Sorry, I used some of Gregg's post but he's 100% correct.
You also never said how much TIME you invested in producing those prints on you inkjet??
I just find it hard to believe, if your clients are that fussy about quality that they would accept prints produced on a $400.00 inkjet over a $200K laser printer! I can see the quality difference between the two a mile away ( I also have very good vision ha,ha)
But seriously go on some wedding or senior forums and you'll see that 99% of the very successful photographers don't give their clients inkjet prints there always talking about there pro labs...Maybe thats why there so successful Gene


To love this comment, log in above
3/12/2004 5:40:11 PM

 

BetterPhoto Member Since: 10/28/2003
  Gene, you have totally and completely taken everything I have said 100% the wrong way. I've already said it, so I'll try hard to to repeat it.
I use my Epson 2200 prints for showing clients, as an example, what could be done. I do not sell my clients those ink jet prints, although I don't see anything wrong with doing so.

I think you may be mistaken about lab work. I do virtually no digital work. I am almost 100% a film photographer. Maybe we are talking apples and oranges. I get all my film scanned by the lab. I go into photoshop, make adjustments, then along with proofs from the lab, show them some photoshopped, Epson printed results, cropped, color corrected, and ready to go. This is a sales tactic I use. They are usually so impressed that they purchase reprints from the lab, not from my printer. Again, my printer is used to show examples of my work, but it is not my work. All my work IS hand done at the lab.

I know this because I talk to the guy. For my black and white he goes into a dark room and physically makes a print the old fashioned way.

Maybe where you are they don't do this anymore. But, where I am there are labs that better well damn do that. They say they do, and I believe them because they talk about how hard it is do dodge or burn or both on some of my prints. Dodging and burning, in my mind, refer to standing, or sitting, at an enlarger and actually doing the work. I know because I used to do this. No computers. Maybe I'm wrong and the terms are used on the computer...I don't know.

But, there are also many labs around that say they do great work, and the work is total crap. And they are all in the $1 for a 5x7 category. I'm not saying that is your case. I don't know what to tell you, but here, in Los Angeles, $6.50 for a hand-made 5x7 is competitive. I can, as I said, get a machine produced print from a color negative for $.99, but they do not look all that great. Sure, they look nice, but not great. I trust you are correct for your area. I hope you can trust that I am correct about my area.

Jerry


To love this comment, log in above
3/12/2004 6:01:08 PM

 
Gene    Shirley: I would like to know how long you have been producing Beautiful Gallery Prints on your inkjet...1 month ?? 6 Months ??? 1 Year ???

3 years ago I printed a Inkjet,a dyesub,a silver halide from the same file and put them in a binder & put them on the shelf..Your welcome to come to my place and see for your self the noticable differences on how the inkjet and dyesub prints ard changing and the Good OLE silver halide is still the same as the day it was printed.
Call your ink manufacturer and tell them your prints are changing and watch the runaround you get from them, I CAN ALMOST GUARANTEE YOU if will be every one or thing imagenable will be falt but not theres.

What do you expect them to say, there inks may not last as long as silver halide, there marketing dept. would be in the unemployment line the next day.

It's a known fact if you buy enough ink to fill a gallon container you will have to invest $6000-$8000 dollars depending on the Mfg.

Silver halide printing has been around for approx, 100 Years and has been refined to make it better and better.
Inkjet technology has been popular under a decade...You do the math

Go visit some techi forums on the web and you'll find out that the verdict is still out on the longevity of inks.

If your still in business 5-10 years from now you may want to have some anwsers when your clients come calling and wanting to know what happened to there Gallery Prints..Hope you have some type of disclamer clause.

For your sake I hope I'm wrong...
we'll see


To love this comment, log in above
3/12/2004 6:25:01 PM

 
Derek Holyhead   Hi Gene,

What lab do you use? Thanks.

Regards,
Del


To love this comment, log in above
3/12/2004 6:28:03 PM

 
Gene    Hi Del: Its TPI, tpiphotolab.com
I've been with them about 5 years now I'm not there biggest account but they sure treat me that way....Customer service is GREAT . Turnaround time is about this best I've found and I've tried a few. They also have this great Remote order entry system to FTP orders to them 24/7
You can go to their website I tried to give a link but I guess this form won't let you....Or maybe its me..
Hope this helps.................Gene


To love this comment, log in above
3/12/2004 7:59:48 PM

 
Shirley D. Cross-Taylor
BetterPhoto Member Since: 1/7/2001
Contact Shirley
Shirley's Gallery
  Sorry, Gene, but I've been printing with my 2200's ultrachrome inks for over a year. I have framed prints all over my home, and in several galleries. They are still as beautiful as when they came out of the printer. There is a big difference in inkjet printers and their inks. My old Epson Stylus 3000 makes beautiful prints, but they do fade or change colors after a time. The length of time depends greatly on how they are stored or displayed. By the way, was the storage sleeve in your binder archival? If not, that also effects the life of your prints. Even with the cost of ink, which I get very reasonably from lexjet.com, I produce my own prints at a great savings from any lab I've ever tried.

Shirley


To love this comment, log in above
3/12/2004 8:21:30 PM

 
Loren Roque   Charlyce:

Clearly we are blessed with a very wide variety of options. A quality inkjet such as an Epson 2200 or 4000 makes for an excellent proof printer, although some may choose dye sub printers for proofing. Inkjet printing onto canvas media is a specialty option for some clients, despite ink longevity issues! And while automated equipment exists for image files processed on archival quality photographic paper, the key to exceptional print quality lies in the hands of a skilled craftsman in the darkroom of a color print processing lab.

Loren Roque


To love this comment, log in above
3/12/2004 8:27:02 PM

 
Loren Roque   Charlyce:

Clearly we are blessed with a very wide variety of options. A quality inkjet such as an Epson 2200 or 4000 makes for an excellent proof printer, although some may choose dye sub printers for proofing. Inkjet printing onto canvas media is a specialty option for some clients, despite ink longevity issues! And while automated equipment exists for image files processed on archival quality photographic paper, the key to exceptional print quality lies in the hands of a skilled craftsman in the darkroom of a color print processing lab.

Loren Roque


To love this comment, log in above
3/12/2004 8:33:14 PM

 
Gus    Yes, the Epson 2200 is great. I need to be able to print to CDs, so I have the Epson R800 ($380). It's limited to 8.5x11. I know people who have the cheaper R300 and they are happy with the quality.


To love this comment, log in above
3/25/2004 7:55:49 PM

 
Marie Anti   Your own photo printer vs pro lab.............I have worked in Pro photo labs since I was 16 and retired at 40 (I'm now in my 50s). When using a lab you have to rely on the quality control and the "color corrector", etc. Not bad if the staff know what they are doing. I have seen more photos that would make your hair stand up (horrible quality) that was done at a pro lab.
I feel you have much better control of what "you" like personally and professionally when you do your own quality control through Photoshop and your own printing on a personal printer.
My own humble opinion. Now I'm in the market, as my previous question states, for a new printer. I was told the latest HP is very good at about $400.00 but I think I may be sold on the Epson 2200. I will probably never make photos larger than 8X12 though. May be a waste???
Marie
Oh, I appreciate all the knowlege on this site.


To love this comment, log in above
4/1/2004 1:38:24 PM

 
Gus    Maybe a waste, though after I purchased the R800 with the 8.5" width limit I started wishing I could do bigger prints! :) However, I really like the R800's capability of direct CD/DVD printing, and the technology is newer. So, I'll never trade it for the 2200. If I need big prints, I guess I have to do Shutterfly.


To love this comment, log in above
4/1/2004 11:52:04 PM

 
Loren Roque   The Epson R300 is an excellent printer for $179.00. The print quality on Epson media is superb, and having CD/DVD media print capability is a MAJOR BONUS. I do not print on CD/DVD media yet, but when I start using printable disks I will do so. I think it is a fair trade-off to outsource the printing for 11"x14" and bigger to have CD/DVD printing capability.


To love this comment, log in above
4/3/2004 9:16:52 AM

 
Gus    Marie, get the low-end R300 or high-end R800 but do not get the HP for photos. I have an HP inkjet a home and we use HP exclusive at work for all our color stuff except photos. They do great inkjet paper, but if you would like to do photos go with a company that has lots of photo paper and a printer with the smallest nozzle and highest ink tank count.


To love this comment, log in above
4/3/2004 11:38:39 AM

 
Log in to respond or ask your own question.