DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register) 
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Photography Discussion >> Does anyone have an recommendation of a printer?
Pages:  
Showing posts 1 - 25 of 30, (reverse)
AuthorThread
 03/09/2004 03:59:12 PM · #1
Looking to buy an inkjet printer good enough to print and sell photo's taken from a Canon 10D. Also, any recommendation on paper?

Thanks...
 03/09/2004 04:02:14 PM · #2
I'm very happy with a Canon i865 and Canon photo paper. If your budget stretches to more than this there are Epsons that are well regarded - perhaps others can help.
 03/09/2004 04:04:46 PM · #3
I recommend the DPCPrints site printers. ;)
 03/09/2004 04:13:31 PM · #4
25 dollar printer, dpcprints.
 03/09/2004 04:15:14 PM · #5
If you are going to sell prints, I would strongly advise against a dye-based inkjet, like the Canons. I will say I have a Canon i960 and it is fantastic, but NOT archival. If you want the prints that you actually sell to last for more than a few years, take a look at the pigment based inkjets, like Epsons--the Epson 2200 seems to be very popular--or a dye-sub printer.

Message edited by author 2004-03-09 16:31:54.
 03/09/2004 04:18:21 PM · #6
I have a discontinued Canon S900 that has been fabulous. All of the higher-end (6+ ink colors) Canon printers offer great image quality, and may be more 'optimized' for your Canon camera. Epsons are good, too, but their printheads tend to get clogged. The Epson 2200 is particularly good for B&W prints. Bear in mind, though, that dye-based prints will fade and pigment-based inks can leave a "metallic" finish on the paper's surface (metamerism).

If you're going to sell photos, though, I would order prints online from PhotoAccess or ShutterFly (or, of course, DPCPrints). You'll get back an archival print on professional photo paper with more depth and dynamic range than ANY inkjet could hope to offer. The prints will resist fading longer than inkjet versions and probably be cheaper than printing them out yourself anyway. A top quality print from an inkjet will cost you about $.40 or $.50 between paper and ink, etc. while a 4x6 from these online services runs about $.30 and looks better to boot. In addition, you'll have a choice of paper finishes and sizes (16x20?) that might not be available to you with an inkjet. Try it... either place offers your first 10 prints for free.

Message edited by author 2004-03-09 16:20:50.
 03/09/2004 04:25:50 PM · #7
i have used shutterfly and have to say that their prints are very high quality. the prices are ... reasonable... if you're gonna sell prints, i'd suggest using someone like them, or DPC. I've found DPC's prints to be the best i've seen yet, and I plan on using them in the not too distant future to make some prints for customers i have coming up.
03/09/2004 04:26:26 PM · #8
The Epson R800 is "TOPDOG" as far as I am concerned. A little pricey at $399 but well worth it.
 03/09/2004 04:46:37 PM · #9
For anything up to 8x10s the Epson R800 looks to be about state of the art, certainly better than the 2200

The 2200 has the advantage of printing larger format though.

These are both pigment based printers, so have the potential to produce archival quality prints, assuming you use the correct papers and treat the results appropriately (i.e., don't mount it in a cheap frame with a cardboard back or something)
 03/09/2004 04:53:44 PM · #10
Epson R300 or Canon i960
 03/09/2004 05:23:47 PM · #11
Thanks everyone. This should help alot...
 03/09/2004 06:17:23 PM · #12
Originally posted by jxpfeer:
i have used shutterfly and have to say that their prints are very high quality. the prices are ... reasonable... if you're gonna sell prints, i'd suggest using someone like them, or DPC. I've found DPC's prints to be the best i've seen yet, and I plan on using them in the not too distant future to make some prints for customers i have coming up.


The 8x12 print from DPC with my f717 looks great. There are no signs that it was shot digitally.
03/09/2004 07:01:00 PM · #13
In my opinion for home is the Canon line, I believe that they just give the best results in image quality. people will go on and on about the archival crap, but that all depends on how the print is displayed. Even a print on FujiColor Çrystal archive paper will fade in years if exposed to unnecassary elements. I have had a print on my refirigerator, half exposed to sun, ozone, (and occassionally wind), since september and have not seen a change yet (Canon i9100). If your prints are matted and framed, the few years argument is bunk.
There are also certain sprays I have heard of, but have not really tried them. WHat paper you are using is a factor also. try also going to Yahoo Groups, there are a bunch on printers and printing that you can check out and get info. I am on the Canon and i9100, and there is tons of info concerning this everyday. I got the Ilford Pearl recc. for paper here and absoutely love the results. Also have an EyeOne display on the way now too.

Try here for lots of info

DPCPrints is still your best bet.

Message edited by author 2004-03-09 19:10:44.
 03/09/2004 07:15:57 PM · #14
Epson Stylus 4000 Pro.
 03/10/2004 05:29:34 AM · #15
I recently had to re-run a bunch of full-page images for someone, so I went and bought the cheapest thing I thought would do it -- an Epson C64. I was printing from Acrobat files so the color was uncalibrated and a little off (but not too red for a change), but the image quality on glossy paper was surprisingly excellent.

The only problems were:
-- need your own USB cable
-- large (approximate 8x10) images took about 10 minutes
-- The printer (with ink cartidges + power cord + CD) costs about $59. A set of replacement cartridges costs about $63. I find it disgusting that it is cheaper to throw away the printer when one of the cartridges runs out and buy a new one, than to buy more ink. It IS using the Dura-Bright ink line, which are supposed to be water/smudge-resistant and relatively archival.
--Costco carries the Epson Glossy photo paper for about $22/120 sheets. Unfortunately, they don't carry those inks ....

I'm only printing through photo-imaging services these days, but if I need something fast and cheap I'd probably get one of these again. Based on my ink usage, it costs about $0.90 - 1.40 per print on 8-1/2x11 paper, depending on paper costs. I can get an 8x10 imaged to Kodak or Fuji paper for about $3.

Message edited by author 2004-03-10 05:34:11.
 04/24/2004 10:09:06 PM · #16
I just purchased an epson r200 (6 cartridge) and I couldn't be happier. For $99 I don't think there is any other printer that can compete. I also tried the epson C84 which was aweful and the canon i560 which would print every too dark. I have printed a whole lot of 4x6s and a few 8x10s and they have turned out perfect. Of course with any printer, use the manufacturers paper for best results.
 04/24/2004 10:17:10 PM · #17
Epson R800

Highest resolution and best archival quality inkset available from Epson right now.
Beautiful output, fast, quiet.

Downsides: complete set of ink is $85
Only prints up to Letter size or 8.5" deep panoramas.
 04/24/2004 10:33:40 PM · #18
For quick test prints I use a Canon i560, this is a fast printer and the ink cost is very low. Then if I want a very high quality print I use Costco, $1.99 for an 8 x 12 and $0.19 for a 4 x 6. I believe you can get a 12 x 18 for around $4.00.
 04/24/2004 10:38:05 PM · #19
Hi,
I just received the Epson Stylus Photo R300. It is simply amazing! My photos come out just beautiful. I recommend this printer to anyone that prints out their own photos. I have not one bad thing to say about this printer.........
 04/24/2004 10:43:05 PM · #20
Originally posted by scalvert:
I have a discontinued Canon S900 that has been fabulous. All of the higher-end (6+ ink colors) Canon printers offer great image quality, and may be more 'optimized' for your Canon camera. Epsons are good, too, but their printheads tend to get clogged. The Epson 2200 is particularly good for B&W prints. Bear in mind, though, that dye-based prints will fade and pigment-based inks can leave a "metallic" finish on the paper's surface (metamerism).

If you're going to sell photos, though, I would order prints online from PhotoAccess or ShutterFly (or, of course, DPCPrints). You'll get back an archival print on professional photo paper with more depth and dynamic range than ANY inkjet could hope to offer. The prints will resist fading longer than inkjet versions and probably be cheaper than printing them out yourself anyway. A top quality print from an inkjet will cost you about $.40 or $.50 between paper and ink, etc. while a 4x6 from these online services runs about $.30 and looks better to boot. In addition, you'll have a choice of paper finishes and sizes (16x20?) that might not be available to you with an inkjet. Try it... either place offers your first 10 prints for free.

Yep I agree
Don’t use a home printer to expansive , ink , paper, maintenance , electricity.
Definitely ShutterFly.
I’ll try Kodak site, Sony site, and very impress with ShutterFly quality.!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Every time they have discount .

04/24/2004 11:27:46 PM · #21
I feel like such an oddball here...I use a Kodak camera which no one else seems to use, I use Corel Photo-paint for editing which no one else seems to use, and for a printer I use an HP. :]

I have to say though, the HP psc2110 (printer, scanner, copier) really makes nice looking prints on glossy or semi gloss paper. It also makes nice scans. And the price was very reasonable at $150.00.
 04/24/2004 11:30:54 PM · #22
I've been very happy with my Epson 1280. Print quality is excellent (I have three of four entries which ribboned in an open art show right now. All were printed on the the 1280.) I haven't tried the online services yet, although I've heard incredible things about DPCPrints.
 04/25/2004 03:17:20 AM · #23
I looked into printers in a great deal of depth about 6 months ago (and also about 2 years before that).

Overall Epson seem to definitely have the edge on photo quality.

I think the build quality on the HP/Canon's may be better though. As photo quality was my issue the Epson range became an easy choice.

I have the Epson 915 which is excellent but probably no better/worse than the similar Epsons.

I saved a lot of money by sticking with an A4 printer. I decided for the very occasional A3 (not sure of US equivalent, but A4 is Letter and A3 double that) I'd get it done by a pro printer.

So, as far as inkjet goes I can't fault the quality of mine, true photo quality ....

However, when I compoare it to something from DPC Prints, or similar non inkjet methond, there is a definite difference and DPC Prints (et al( win hands down and are worth the extra, especially if you are selling.

One warning with the Epsons ... apparently the ink dies up if not used far faster than other makes.


04/25/2004 05:05:54 AM · #24
It is now another month since the last post and the picture on the fridge has no signs of fading or etc.
From alot of what I have read, the Canon's are ahead in quality (not my opinion-but I back it). Ihave read on Epson's pigment is they clog alot (on the Yahoo Epson group) and the printheads wear out faster and are not user replacable like alot of Canon.
To get alot of info the groups on Yahoo provides it. read through them and see what you need.
Again, alot of the problems with archival is how it is displayed and mounted (glass, etc.)
 04/25/2004 08:43:39 AM · #25
Originally posted by dacrazyrn:
It is now another month since the last post and the picture on the fridge has no signs of fading or etc.
From alot of what I have read, the Canon's are ahead in quality (not my opinion-but I back it). Ihave read on Epson's pigment is they clog alot (on the Yahoo Epson group) and the printheads wear out faster and are not user replacable like alot of Canon.
To get alot of info the groups on Yahoo provides it. read through them and see what you need.
Again, alot of the problems with archival is how it is displayed and mounted (glass, etc.)


I have heard that about the Epson inks, but haven't come across it myself, maybe as I use the printer a lot.

I am very surprised though that you are finding most articles favour Canon for print quality though. When I researched, admittedly 6 months ago, the Epson's came a clear first in just about every review I read. Most of my research was in the printed media rather than online, not sure if that makes a difference. The canons either came second or third in some cases where HP beat them.

I don't know if it is advertising hype or not, and this may have been discussed and I missed it, but I believe the new Epson inks have by far the longest fade times of the lot.
Pages:  
Current Server Time: 04/19/2024 08:07:45 PM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


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 08:07:45 PM EDT.