| Author | Thread |
|
|
10/09/2006 02:58:31 PM · #1 |
I have been working for a wedding photography studio and decided to start my own wedding photography business... Where I was working, they had a lab do the developing and prints. My business is all digital, and I was wondering if anyone could suggest the ideal printer to be able to do my own prints and provide them to the client as the final prints. Could some please help. Just a suggestion would do. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 03:16:35 PM · #2 |
|
|
|
10/09/2006 03:17:56 PM · #3 |
I went to a workshop where a very high-end wedding photographer was explaining how he did all of his own prints. He was using epson printers, I'm thinking the equivalent of the R1800/R2400 but from about 18 months ago. I can look up my notes this evening, but R1800/R2400 is going to get better prints than a lab and you can probably find some way to market as fine art prints or something similar.
|
|
|
|
10/09/2006 03:23:35 PM · #4 |
My brother started a company that designs custom printers and I asked him to look at the Epson and Canon printers for me. He indicated that it looked like the Epson printers used better head technology....
p.s. My brother's company designed the first printer used to print custom comments on M&M. |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 09:27:02 PM · #5 |
| Thanks all for your suggestions. This really helps! |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 09:43:20 PM · #6 |
If you care to do a search in the forums, there are two threads I started about how printers work.
One is called 'Printers and DPI numbers explored' or something similar
and the other is 'Printer Wars - Canon vs Epson
In it, myself and others discuss the relative merits of each system.
The general conclusion of the matter was that at the 100 dollar level, Canon has the edge for quality and bang for the buck. Epson has recently struck back with excellent quality in the R360 (?) but still is a bit behind in color ranges and versatility due to it's using only one black.
At the larger sizes, Epson pulls away with the K3 technology defined as having 3 separate blacks. One at 1/1, one at 1/2 and one at 1/6.
This allows for higher quality gradients particularly in low chroma areas of the photo. This is ESPECIALLY useful in the area of wedding photography which often highlights delicate gradients in whites.
Further, using MORE ink, while it may be more expensive, allows for better photographic longevity because of the sealing and light protection that it affords.
My strong recommendation would be to look closely at the R1800 and R2400 in the Epson lineup for more serious work and larger prints. Choose which one you want based on the number of blacks. (IMHO) |
|
|
|
10/11/2006 09:58:11 PM · #7 |
Epson Stylus Pro 3800
This has the best quality and gives the most bang for the buck of any printer on the market. It is the standard on which others will be compared.
Btw, regardless what printer you get you will want to get a good RIP software for it if you are doing professional work.
Message edited by author 2006-10-11 22:01:16.
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 10:06:25 PM · #8 |
Seconded. I have the i9900, and I love it. Can't wait to order my new ipf5000!
|
|
|
|
10/11/2006 11:39:26 PM · #9 |
Although I've considered purchasing a high-end printer myself, I've held off waiting until I get a larger percentage of 11x14" and larger prints (I only do a few of these a month right now).
My thinking is this: For anything 8x10" and under, it probably costs *less* to have my local photo lab print my pictures than what it would cost for me to print them myself (ink, paper, maintenance, etc).
But as the number of large print orders continues to increase, I've got my eye on a nice Epson printer. :-)
|
|
|
|
10/12/2006 09:53:01 AM · #10 |
| if you want to go for a high end printer check out the new z series from hp. 12 pigment inks with more longevity than epson or cannon and a built in spectrometer for profiling! there is an excellent first look video at www.luminous-landscape.com and there is talk of a smaller version being introduced. i think these hp printers have set a new benchmark. |
|
|
|
10/12/2006 10:13:19 AM · #11 |
Originally posted by dwterry:
My thinking is this: For anything 8x10" and under, it probably costs *less* to have my local photo lab print my pictures than what it would cost for me to print them myself (ink, paper, maintenance, etc).
But as the number of large print orders continues to increase, I've got my eye on a nice Epson printer. :-) |
It definitely costs less to get them printed if you are talking about bulk printing (say >100 different (or the same) prints). Home printing is a relatively expensive affair, simply because the consumables are amongst some of the most expensive materials in the entire world. |
|
Home -
Challenges -
Community -
League -
Photos -
Cameras -
Lenses -
Learn -
Prints! -
Help -
Terms of Use -
Privacy -
Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2024 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 12:30:33 PM EDT.
