PDA

View Full Version : photo printers



cha chapman
11-09-2004, 09:01 PM
:) I have been operating a small photo studio in my home for the last few years. I purchased a Canon Eos 10D digital SLR last spring. Since that time I have been more pleased with my own printing than the prints I get back from the lab. I am however concerned about the archival quality and paper I am using. I am getting great results with my Canon i850 printer and have favorable responses from my clients. I would like to upgrade to a more durable & professional printer without spending an arm & a leg, since I have put a great deal of money into my equipment (camera, light kit, backdrops, etc.). Any suggestions as to what type of printer & paper I might buy? Does it seem feasible to continue printing my own?

leewitt
11-10-2004, 05:34 AM
The best choice at reasonable cost is the Epson 2200. It is a pigment based printer that provides good longevity. It prints very well on flat matte, premium luster and premium semigloss papers but some have reported issues with glossy papers.

suemccartin
11-10-2004, 08:05 AM
:) I have been operating a small photo studio in my home for the last few years. I purchased a Canon Eos 10D digital SLR last spring. Since that time I have been more pleased with my own printing than the prints I get back from the lab. I am however concerned about the archival quality and paper I am using. I am getting great results with my Canon i850 printer and have favorable responses from my clients. I would like to upgrade to a more durable & professional printer without spending an arm & a leg, since I have put a great deal of money into my equipment (camera, light kit, backdrops, etc.). Any suggestions as to what type of printer & paper I might buy? Does it seem feasible to continue printing my own?

I've got an 850 also, great printer--although I just had to replace the head after 2 years of what I'd call pretty light use. The newer Pixma line (especially the 6000D with dual paper paths) is getting great reviews too.

Personally.....you couldn't pay me to buy an Epson but that's just my opinion.

The inks are the same between the 850 and the pixma--the 6000D just adds photocyan and photomagenta to the mix. The most expensive canon paper is supposedly stable for something like 25 years--but not sure it's guaranteed. I'm not sure anyone has anything yet that will survive like photo processing paper does and if you really want to you could just go that route and charge your customer extra for the extra leg work (some places even let you upload the pictures from home and do it all by mail). I know the paper has gotten a lot better than it was a few years ago for the home photo printer. I've had about 30 8x10's printed on cheapie staples glossy paper hanging in my office for 3 years and they're fine (no light degradation that I can see) and compared to what I saw with some older prints on old paper that's good if you ask me.

D70FAN
11-10-2004, 02:24 PM
I've got an 850 also, great printer--although I just had to replace the head after 2 years of what I'd call pretty light use. The newer Pixma line (especially the 6000D with dual paper paths) is getting great reviews too.

Personally.....you couldn't pay me to buy an Epson but that's just my opinion.

The inks are the same between the 850 and the pixma--the 6000D just adds photocyan and photomagenta to the mix. The most expensive canon paper is supposedly stable for something like 25 years--but not sure it's guaranteed. I'm not sure anyone has anything yet that will survive like photo processing paper does and if you really want to you could just go that route and charge your customer extra for the extra leg work (some places even let you upload the pictures from home and do it all by mail). I know the paper has gotten a lot better than it was a few years ago for the home photo printer. I've had about 30 8x10's printed on cheapie staples glossy paper hanging in my office for 3 years and they're fine (no light degradation that I can see) and compared to what I saw with some older prints on old paper that's good if you ask me.

There is a difference between printing for your own personal use, and printing a keepsake for someone as part of your business.

There are several photo-papers, and inks, that can exceed an 80 year fade life, made by 3rd party companies and of course both Epson and Canon.

Both companies (and now HP as well) offer features, and benefits important to Photo businesses. I know art-print people who would not think of using a Canon, and portrait photographers who swear by the Canons. With properly set up systems you would be hard-pressed to tell the difference.

I have both an 870 small format (8 x 10 or smaller) printer and a 2000P pigmented ink medium format (up to 13 x 44) printer and in the past several years of work, both have clogged, but never failed to make wonderful prints, after the occasional cleaning cycle. I rarely print 4 x 6 so it's a don't care, and those now go to the 1 hour place or I crank a few 29 cent-ers at the corner drug store.

Like most loyalties, printers have their followers. As for print longevity, inks and papers are the determining factor, not who made the printer.

I don't run a photo business per-se, but I do a fair number of photo-shoots and printing for freinds, and associates, where I want to make sure that 25 years from now that portrait of the birthday child, a grandparent, or wedding party, looks as good as the day it was printed. It's more personal pride in my work than having to reprint down the road.

There have been some definitive studies on this subject so you might find the following information handy:

http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,50663,00.asp