Home Printing vs Professional

[Dan Fleming]

I don't know if this has been posted elsewhere but I had a question. Can printing at home rival professionally made prints? I am only interested in prints up to 8x10". Is the cost prohibitive? What other thought do you have on that?

[Sean Setters]

I've been doing a bit of research on this in the last few days, actually. From what I've found out, yes, printing at home can rival professionally made prints assuming you're using a good printer, good ink, and good paper. It can actually save you money *if* you do make alot of prints.


In fact, yesterday I purchased a Canon PIXMA Pro9000 Mark II and about $100 in Ilford Smooth Pearl paper. We'll see how that goes... ;-)

[Alexander]

I also have the Canon Pro 9000 and use Ilford Smooth Pearl paper. You will not be disappointed using this paper.

[apersson850]

I have the Canon Pixma MP970 printer. It works fine for home printing, in sizes up to A4.


For small prints, any internet based lab is cheaper, but nothing can compare to the simplicity of printing yourself, when you want to.


It can also print ordinary documents on ordinary paper, but I prefer to use my significantly faster Kyocera 5100 for that. Laser is better for documents.

[jimr]

I have a top of line photograph printer... it is not cheaper by any means. But it does allow you to print the same picture over and over again until the colors are just right and the turn around time is minutes.


Do I use it lots? no. A couple times of year I produce a photo where the color has to be exact and I mean exact - I can not send it away and hope the color match is was need. At that point I will print the same image a few dozen times just to get it right and cost is usually not on my mind (although it should be at 3AM).


Has it paid for itself? no. I may have covered the cost of paper and inks but because I typically print out a dozen or more of the same photo, to get the colors just right, I have my doubts that I have recouped the cost of the printer - Which I am sure can be purchased for under $1000 now.


Would I recommend a photographic printer... nope. A waste of money and time in my opinion. With a bit of pre-planning I could use a high end print service to get the exact colors I need in my photographs. As it stands I try to use print services as much as I can as it is far cheaper and I do not need to waste my time trying to print a photograph (sometimes to 3AM). I am not a professional printer, it is not my love or passion.


A cheap color printer to get you the general idea of what the color print will physically look like in a frame or on the wall is a better choice. I have very cheap color printer for this purpose and it servers as a regular black and white text printer with out breaking the bank. I have seen some mid-grade photographic printers but the cost of inks just turns me right off.

[WAFKT]

It's going to matter greatly on the size of prints and the number of prints that you will be producing. While respectable quality 8x10 photo printers are pretty affordable to buy - their consumables (sheet photo paper and ink cartridges) cost a bloody fortune (and are not very efficient, which adds to their cost and frequency of replacement).


My best bet, for that size format, you may be best sending your photos to a printing company if you're trying for strickly the cheapest option (especially if you only print occasionally); just be sure to invest in a decent quality hardware colour calibrator (e.g. Spyder3, etc...) so that you can be confident that the colours on your screen will be properly produced at the printer (oh, and make sure that you choose a reputable printing company that uses proper colour profiles for their equipment and media).


Most consumer don't purchase photo printers for their economy, but rather their convenience and quick turn-around.


If you're planning to produce a lot of 8x10 prints then a consumer or mid-range photo printer is likely not going to cut it and you'd want to look at something a little more high end (better components and large separate ink reservoirs - at least 6 colour). Most printing companies offer per print discounts for bulk orders - further screwing the cost issue. Also consider that if you're going to be printing a load of images, that you may need to be near by to babysit the process - factor your time into the cost equation.


When you step up to larger format sizes (e.g. 11x13 or 16x10 and up) you're obviously entering into a totally different realm of printer. I have a Canon iPF5100 which can print up to 17" wide on a roll media (or sheet). Roll media is much cheaper than sheets (at least it can be if you plan ahead on how to print things). Unlike some lower end consumer models that place multiple colours in one cartridge, mid to high end printers have larger individual ink cartridges and have at least 6 to 8 different colours. Mine has 12 individual ink reservoirs, so I only have to replace the ones that run out (would be looking at about $1200 to replace all the cartridges at once - but these things carry 130mL of each colour so they last a while) - they also use a different type of ink than most consumer photo printers (last longer, different light refraction for more vivid colours, etc...). It also has 2 individual print heads (most consumer model inkjet printers incorporate the print head into the cartridge, making replacement ink just that much more expensive because of the integrated circuitry (not to mention the environmental waste). Printing larger format images yourself (if you print say around 30-50 or more 16x10's in a year) is by far cheaper than sending them out for printing. I worked it out once and figured that I only need to print about 130 16x10 prints to break even with my purchase of the printer and its consumables - if I consider that I'll use it for about 5 years that's only about 26 16x10 prints per year at cost - if I'm selling these images (which is of course the goal) then that break even point drops to about 50-60 prints in it's lifetime (or 10-12 16x10 prints sold per year) when compared to the cost I'd have to pay a local professional photo printing company - if I print more than that it's essentially profit (with a small bit set a side for maintenance).


In either case if you do choose to print your images yourself or outsource them, pickup a quality colour calibrator and get in the habit of calibrating your monitor (and printer) regularly and be sure that the correct colour profiles are then being used when printed.

[Dan Fleming]

Wow, thanks for the good information. I print maybe 20 pictures a year, so it sounds like getting a printer is not right for me. I will stick to professional printing.





Dan