Lp Btch's Aboot Prntr's

[LP]

So, yes... every has a personal printer, well almost everyone I'd imagine.

 

 

 

When it comes to printing text documents and invoices and other such things its a saintly machine that makes life a little bit easier.

 

 

 

But when it comes to printing photos I find printers to be a complete waste, unless you get those little photo-specific printers, which I've never used. When I print out a picture on maximum quality I'm still often left with streaks and marks because the mechanism that ejects the paper doesn't operate 100% smooth. Another thing is that ink is expensive, and when printing photos it completely kills your ink supply, and is economically... a disaster.

 

 

 

Today I printed off one 8x10, and four 4x6 prints on photo/glossy paper at max quality today using a brand-new cartridge, after that was all complete my ink meter read a little above half way, and still the quality wasn't that great in my opinion. (mind you this is a fairly new printer)

 

 

 

Unless you have the money to buy a professional printer I think its safe to say most suck for photos.

 

 

 

Anyone know of any economy friendly ways to get quality prints through printing at home, and not having to go to print-shops and paying upwards of $3 for a 9x12 glossy non-photo print, (which is still probably a better value than paying for your own ink)?

 

 

 

Feel free to B*tch about your printer.

[blade995]

I disagree. I have a HP printer which my Mom just bought for like $140. It prints out amazing photos which you would never be able to tell the difference between one of them and a professional print, if your using the right paper. Maybe you need to do an alignment check and clear the printing heads?

 

 

 

One thing I would b*tch about is how slow the printing takes. It can take over 2 minutes to print 1 photo. Trying to copy a photo directly from the scanner is even longer.

 

 

 

The ink isn't too bad but it does run out fast when printing in photo quality, just like all the others. The HP ink is cheaper than the rest which is good. You can get 2 black and 1 collor cartridge for like $30 at a wholesale place (BJs, Costco)

[Hobgoblin11]

I'd disagree as well. My printer prints them out fine, the ink consumption is a bit high, but other than that, nothing to moan about.

 

 

 

I'd still rather take my SD card to Boots or whatever, to get my photos printed out, it costs as little as 5p a print, which is peanuts, and you just take the card in, come in the next day, and they're there waiting for you. Much easier!

[Cruiser]

Make me #3 on the disagree side.

 

 

 

We have a Canon Pixma ip6000D (I think that's the model, it's since been revised a few times) printer at my dad's that we use for on-site photo printing at various events that we then sell right there on the spot. Printing on photo paper using photo quality still yields some 40+ 4x6's in addition to quite a few 8.5x11 prints before it starts complaining about ink. It does a very good job of using every drop of ink it can in the cartridge before forcing you to replace it. We generally get another 10 to 15 prints out of it after it starts warning about low ink before it demands a replacement.

 

 

 

The key is finding a printer that uses separate color cartridges (Example - this is the black we buy for our printer) instead of those cheesy all in one tanks that come with the print head built into them. Much easier to deal with low ink levels and you get a lot more prints out of your tanks because you aren't replacing the entire set because one color is dead. You don't have the insane costs of replacing the print head each time you buy a new cartridge too.

[Hobgoblin11]

Yes, but that is still $8.99 per cartridge, approximately ÃÆââ¬Å¡Ãâã4.50, 4.50/50 (photos) = 9p per print, and that is only using black ink. You then have the cost of the other 5 colour cartridges, plus paper,plus the cost of the printer, all pushing the cost per print up way higher than the 5p per print you can get by taking your photos to be printed at Asda.

 

 

 

I know thats not the point you're making, as you're selling photos on location, but I'm just saying that it works out much more expensive to use your own printer.

[Cruiser]

I never said it was cheaper, for a business venture or personal use. Yes the cost of ink and paper is more, but that's what happens when you aren't buying ink by the gallon and paper in bulk.

 

 

 

He's complaining about printing photos at home, so I pointed out what I've used and what I'm very happy with. We use that exact same printer for personal photo's as well, so it being used for a small business makes little difference. He asked for opinions on printing your own photos, not what you think is the best professional print shop to take your SD card to.

[zonda]

As far as printers go... I pretty much sell printers all day, which gets kind of sickening but I can tell you that no one can really match HP's price and quality.

 

 

 

If your looking specifically for photoprints look into getting Canon, however if you want something that can print good photos and won't waste of ton of ink, get HP...

 

 

 

Any of their models with the individual ink catridges (SP?) would be your best bet. While the printer itself will cost more, it will be must more in effecitient and economical. Long story short, you save alot of ink.

 

 

 

Tricolor catridges contain cyan magenta and yellow in 1 cartridge... yellow gets used the most to create the other colors, leaving you with plenty of cyan and magenta and very little yellow... in other words, you have to waste 50% of your ink and get a new catridge.

 

 

 

The new catridges not only conserve alot more ink, but they also have the light cyan and the light magenta, meaning the ammount of yellow being used is decreased.

 

 

 

As far as features go... things like the slots for your SD and XD cards are standard nowadays, so don't let someone go telling you that its a fancy deal, thats like a cupholder in a car. The MAIN difference you will see that effect price is:

 

If it has copy/scan/fax ability

 

If it is pre-networked / wireless

 

Ink efficientcy

 

 

 

The last one I mentioned is the biggest difference - In fact there are a few printers where I work that look identical accept one has a larger LCD screen and is $50 more so people just assume that your paying for a 2cm larger screen... not true at all. The cartridge for the more expesive one costs $2 more... but in the long run you get about 200 more prints from it.

 

 

 

My biggest suggestion is DO NOT go with a brother printer - the printers are cheap but it wastes a crapload of ink and ink is very expensive.

 

 

 

And as for price... with the newer HP printers you can print photo's for 22 to 24 cents per page. At walmart or walgreens they can print them for 18 or 19 cents per page so yes, they are cheaper... mainly you are just paying for convenience.

 

 

 

Hope I helped.

[LP]

indeed, im using a lexmark right now :roll:

 

 

 

next time I look into getting a printer HP or Canon it will be.

[mikercool]

All printers but HP are a disposable turd.

[zonda]

All printers but HP are a disposable turd.

 

 

 

Not true, but okay...

 

 

 

If your going to say something, at least provide actual information to back up your statements - or at least make it sound like you know what your talking about if nothing else.

[stevepole]

I have an older brother that is a photographer and he has a cannon...Not much to my post but he gets paid to that photo so i would figure that quality matters on prints so possibly look into a cannon. Again not to much to my post to back anything up with thou, but i also have a cannon that prints out good photos, but i really dont know where im going with this...try cannon.

[m4tty]

i disagree, i have some sort of hp photo printer which didnt cost alot, but it is quite high end, and it prints perfectly.

[mikercool]

I have had my HP for over 4 Years and have never had it do anything weird; I hear all these people that have printers that last 2 weeks and stuff...