Is it worth getting a photo printer?

[jsecordphoto]

you can pick up a pixma pro 100 for very cheap. People buy the camera+printer kits then sell the printers new all the time, I see at least a few on craigslist every time I check. I've loved having mine. I like to run 4x6 test prints before uploading new images to my website, and if customers want smaller prints, the quality is on par with the luster prints I usually get from BayPhoto. Plus, if there's any issue with printing- I just run another one.

 

[bhop]

Eh.. I have a few years old Canon Pixma ip4800 that I print b&w on all the time. (with the greyscale setting) I've never noticed any problems with the way the prints look. I've had professional prints made and they look very similar. Maybe you guys are way more picky than me.. *shrug

 

[table1349]

Picky in terms of wanting the photo to not fade, yes. That is why I have a low end professional printer that uses archival inks instead of a standard inkjet. Not that much more expensive to buy and the photos last a good long time.

 

[gsgary]

Picky in terms of wanting the photo to not fade, yes. That is why I have a low end professional printer that uses archival inks instead of a standard inkjet. Not that much more expensive to buy and the photos last a good long time.

Another reason my prints are made in the darkroom proven longevity

Sent from my SM-G903F using Tapatalk

 

[bhop]

Picky in terms of wanting the photo to not fade, yes. That is why I have a low end professional printer that uses archival inks instead of a standard inkjet. Not that much more expensive to buy and the photos last a good long time.

I can see that as a good reason to be picky. I personally use Canon Chromalife 100+ inks in my printer. They claim (from their site) "ChromaLife100.....Prints resist fading for 100 years when album-stored, 30 years when displayed under glass and 10 years when exposed to the effects of the air"

That's long enough for me. If I were making gallery prints, i'd have them made professionally.

When I was reading the earlier posts about b&w in the thread "try it and you'll see" types of comments that seem to be more about the way it looks, which, for me is confusing because when I print, it looks the same to me.

 

[table1349]

My Epson uses UltraChrome K3 ink. They claim 108 years for color and 200 years for B&W. What I do know is I have a photo I printed 2 copies of when I first got the printer. I stored one in my safe, climate controlled, nice and dark, and the other has been on the wall in the living room. They still appear to be identical in color and contrast. Yes I was skeptical of the claims when I got it.