Do you print your own work?

is photography worth doing if you never print your work?

  • Yes

    Votes: 16 80.0%
  • No

    Votes: 3 15.0%
  • Maybe

    Votes: 1 5.0%

  • Total voters
    20
  • Poll closed .
Generally I print my own, with the exception of Photographs of Lincoln, Grant, Jefferson, Hamilton & Franklin. For some reason the U.S. Guberment gets really upset when I print them. Something about them numbers with them $ signs on the photos that ticks em off.
 
Most of my personal stuff I never print. But all my work related stuff ends up in magazines, brochures and large prints.
 
Being retired I rarely print my own work. Most of the little commercial work I do is submitted via the internet. Although when someone submits a photo for restoration, or manipulation, the result goes out to a commercial print shop and usually I put it back in the same frame the original was in.
 
Print my own color, generally in a size that fits well on 13 x 19 paper.
(I bought a 5 boxes of Canon Semi-gloss and just love it)

I send out black and white to a place that uses Epsom 7 or 8 tone grey inks.

The real mark of a picture is how it looks in a print, I think.
 
Yes, i think it's worth doing regardless - you may get into printing later on. I get nice results from the local fuji lab. I can optically print at home. I like to support specialists that have set up small businesses to provide the service.
 
The OP said "Also as an extra question in the poll: is photography worth doing if you never print your work?"
To my mind it's a different question. "Is it worth doing photos if the photos are not VIEWED" My answer is that my photos are viewed on 4 different laptops, 2 desktop units and a number of internet sites so yes even my few photos are worth doing.
 
The OP said "Also as an extra question in the poll: is photography worth doing if you never print your work?"
To my mind it's a different question. "Is it worth doing photos if the photos are not VIEWED" My answer is that my photos are viewed on 4 different laptops, 2 desktop units and a number of internet sites so yes even my few photos are worth doing.
Do you realize how expensive it is to hang laptops and desktops all over the house on the wall? :lol:

I would have to agree, unless it is for business, then the need/want to print your own depends on the viewing needs. Me, I print what we hang around the house. With 3 grand daughters, 13, 6, & 4 pictures change every few months or less. (Happy wife, happy life) I prefer to do it myself.
For someone that is viewing them electronically for the most part let someone else print what you need.
 
I only print my work when someone says "Wow, that is a wall hanger".



So in other words....no I have not printed my work yet. :(
 
Wait till you have grand daughters. There are a lot of "wall hangers" that grandma wants printed. :lol:
 
I print a lot. Most photos that I put online are cropped in 5x7 ratio because I like that size photo over a 4x6 so if at all I can fit it in that ratio practically and it looks ok I will do so.

I regularly print at home, but a lab is better, especially for black and white with my set up (printer is on the budget side). I use permajet oyster for the most part.

Most photos I have seen look better in print than in digital format. You can't really pixel peep a print
 
For me, the cost of purchasing, supplying, and maintaining equipment capable of producing excellent prints is simply not worth it.

I'll happily have my better shot printed by the pros. If you feel differently, sure- there's nothing wrong with taking satisfaction in making your own prints. Also nothing wrong with never having prints made if you don't see the need. It's all good.
 
My work is largely editorial, so it gets printed in the press or appears online. Every once in a while I get the urge to print something to hang on a wall. Lately, I've taken up making etchings, and am using my photos to base them on. Hand-printing from a copper etching plate is something else in terms of satisfaction! I'm hooked!
 

Most reactions

Back
Top