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.