Photo printing - consummable costs

Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

Having recently acquired a nice new high resolution digital camera I am
looking for a suitable photo printer to partner it. I am primarily
interested in producing good quality 6 by 4 inch photos, and am not
overconcerned about other printing aspects as I use an ancient but highly
economical HP laserjet 5p for correspondence and also have a HP 840c if I
want to go to colour for letterheads etc (I don't usually bother). I don't
envisage using my photoprinter away from home so portability is not an issue
nor will I usually go above 6x4 although the facility to do so occasionally
would be nice.

I was thinking of a Canon PixMA IP4000 for which I have seen good write ups
and because Canon cartridges look noticeably cheaper than Epson or HP but a
guy at PCWorld has said this is misleading because Canon uses a different
print process to Epson which wastes less ink and produces better results. He
also said that because Canon printers run hotter they wear quicker. I have a
prejudice against Epson because I used to have a 600 model which was forever
blocking (finally apparently irretrievably) unless used daily.

Am I being sold a tale or not? When I buy it will probably be on Ebay in any
case.

Peter
13 answers Last reply
More about photo printing consummable costs
  1. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Peter Balcombe wrote:

    >Having recently acquired a nice new high resolution digital camera I am
    >looking for a suitable photo printer to partner it. I am primarily
    >interested in producing good quality 6 by 4 inch photos,

    If you want to print a lot of photos, the cost is way too high with OEM
    ink (Canon/Epson/HP) and photo paper, costing between $1-2 each, some
    even more.

    The only cost effective way to print your own photos, is to refill your
    ink cartridges and buy third-party photo paper. With those, you can drop
    the 4x6 photo costs down to about 20-30 cents each.

    And if you buy a decent 4-colour printer, you keep those costs at the
    lowest end of the scale because you only need to refill 4 cartridges
    instead of 6 or 8.

    >I was thinking of a Canon PixMA IP4000 for which I have seen good write ups

    That is apparently a good model, and it only uses 4 colours, keeping
    costs down.

    >and because Canon cartridges look noticeably cheaper than Epson or HP but a
    >guy at PCWorld has said this is misleading because Canon uses a different
    >print process to Epson which wastes less ink and produces better results.

    If you compare per cartridge page yield (not ink volume), you'll find
    all of the big three companies have roughly the same ink costs. So yes,
    the marketing hype is misleading.

    >also said that because Canon printers run hotter they wear quicker.

    That seems to be true - the printheads do not last very long. Canon
    printheads are rated up to a claimed 18,000 pages, but I've seen several
    printheads that died long before that, as little as 3,000 pages.

    However if you refill, replacement cost isn't as bad.

    It's all a balancing act.
    :)
  2. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    On 7/22/2005 10:53 AM, Peter Balcombe wrote:
    > Having recently acquired a nice new high resolution digital camera I am
    > looking for a suitable photo printer to partner it. I am primarily
    > interested in producing good quality 6 by 4 inch photos, and am not
    > overconcerned about other printing aspects as I use an ancient but highly
    > economical HP laserjet 5p for correspondence and also have a HP 840c if I
    > want to go to colour for letterheads etc (I don't usually bother). I don't
    > envisage using my photoprinter away from home so portability is not an issue
    > nor will I usually go above 6x4 although the facility to do so occasionally
    > would be nice.
    >
    > I was thinking of a Canon PixMA IP4000 for which I have seen good write ups
    > and because Canon cartridges look noticeably cheaper than Epson or HP but a
    > guy at PCWorld has said this is misleading because Canon uses a different
    > print process to Epson which wastes less ink and produces better results. He
    > also said that because Canon printers run hotter they wear quicker. I have a
    > prejudice against Epson because I used to have a 600 model which was forever
    > blocking (finally apparently irretrievably) unless used daily.
    >
    > Am I being sold a tale or not? When I buy it will probably be on Ebay in any
    > case.
    >
    > Peter
    >
    >
    You should be very pleased with the Canon printer, and it is very
    convenient to make your own prints. You will want to create a profile
    for the printer and the paper you are using that will give the best
    match between what you see on the screen and what you see in your prints.

    But the cheapest way to make 4x6 prints is to do your printing at
    Walmart, CVS, etc. You can bring in your files in machine readable
    form, or even better, e-mail them in and pick them up. If you e-mail
    your files the prints will be waiting for you when you go to pick them
    up and cost less than doing it yourself.

    Bernie
  3. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    The iP4000 would be a good choice, but so is the iP5000. Try to find the
    best online deal since eBay often isn't the least expensive route due to
    excessive shipping charges most sellers tack on to the purchase price and
    that the rebates have already been used. If you were in the US there are
    some great deals available, but I don't know how good the prices are in GB.
    I've had several Canon photo printers and my iP4000 is the one I prefer over
    the others (s820 & i950). As to the ink issue, the iP4000 is quite frugal
    when it comes to ink consumption. The printer isn't prone to clogging with
    either OEM or third party ink which is usually very inexpensive. I'm sure
    you are aware of the troll on this newsgroup who continually posts
    misleading comments about third party inks. He posts false information and
    claims that only OEM ink is safe, which is completely untrue. Canon printers
    have tended to have a higher print head burnout rate than some Epson's, but
    with moderate to even heavy usage I don't think you would see much
    difference between Canon or Epson. The Pixma line appears to be more
    reliable than previous models so I wouldn't worry too much about what the
    salesman said. The main thing is to print something (a web page etc...)
    every few days to prevent the printhead from drying out and that will
    eliminate 99% of any clogging issues.
    --
    Ron

    "Peter Balcombe" <pete.balcombe@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
    news:QD8Ee.1027$hr4.970@newsfe6-win.ntli.net...
    > Having recently acquired a nice new high resolution digital camera I am
    > looking for a suitable photo printer to partner it. I am primarily
    > interested in producing good quality 6 by 4 inch photos, and am not
    > overconcerned about other printing aspects as I use an ancient but highly
    > economical HP laserjet 5p for correspondence and also have a HP 840c if I
    > want to go to colour for letterheads etc (I don't usually bother). I don't
    > envisage using my photoprinter away from home so portability is not an
    > issue nor will I usually go above 6x4 although the facility to do so
    > occasionally would be nice.
    >
    > I was thinking of a Canon PixMA IP4000 for which I have seen good write
    > ups and because Canon cartridges look noticeably cheaper than Epson or HP
    > but a guy at PCWorld has said this is misleading because Canon uses a
    > different print process to Epson which wastes less ink and produces better
    > results. He also said that because Canon printers run hotter they wear
    > quicker. I have a prejudice against Epson because I used to have a 600
    > model which was forever blocking (finally apparently irretrievably) unless
    > used daily.
    >
    > Am I being sold a tale or not? When I buy it will probably be on Ebay in
    > any case.
    >
    > Peter
    >
  4. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    "Bill" <bill@c.a> wrote in message news:NdGdnZMkYuDUyXzfRVn-2w@golden.net...
    > Peter Balcombe wrote:
    >
    >>Having recently acquired a nice new high resolution digital camera I am
    >>looking for a suitable photo printer to partner it. I am primarily
    >>interested in producing good quality 6 by 4 inch photos,
    >
    > If you want to print a lot of photos, the cost is way too high with OEM
    > ink (Canon/Epson/HP) and photo paper, costing between $1-2 each, some
    > even more.

    Your figures may be correct for 8x10" prints, but the original poster is asking
    about 4x6 prints. Several manufacturers offer bundled paper/ink combinations
    that offer 4x6 prints at less than $0.30 each. For example, see
    http://www.shopping.hp.com/webapp/shopping/product_detail.do?product_code=Q7932AN%23140.

    Regards,
    Bob Headrick, not speaking for my employer HP
  5. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    On Fri, 22 Jul 2005 15:53:20 GMT, "Peter Balcombe"
    <pete.balcombe@ntlworld.com> wrote:

    >Having recently acquired a nice new high resolution digital camera I am
    >looking for a suitable photo printer to partner it. I am primarily
    >interested in producing good quality 6 by 4 inch photos, and am not
    >overconcerned about other printing aspects as I use an ancient but highly
    >economical HP laserjet 5p for correspondence and also have a HP 840c if I
    >want to go to colour for letterheads etc (I don't usually bother). I don't
    >envisage using my photoprinter away from home so portability is not an issue
    >nor will I usually go above 6x4 although the facility to do so occasionally
    >would be nice.
    >
    >I was thinking of a Canon PixMA IP4000 for which I have seen good write ups
    >and because Canon cartridges look noticeably cheaper than Epson or HP but a
    >guy at PCWorld has said this is misleading because Canon uses a different
    >print process to Epson which wastes less ink and produces better results. He
    >also said that because Canon printers run hotter they wear quicker. I have a
    >prejudice against Epson because I used to have a 600 model which was forever
    >blocking (finally apparently irretrievably) unless used daily.
    >
    >Am I being sold a tale or not? When I buy it will probably be on Ebay in any
    >case.
    >
    If all you want is 6x4 and the occasional say 10x8 then don't waste
    your money on a photo printer. It's far more economic to get them
    printed for you. I don't know what's available in the US (I'm in the
    UK) but you can either use local stores, or upload to a Net site.
    Either will prove much more wallet friendly than a photo printer for
    the size you want.

    --

    Hecate - The Real One
    Hecate@newsguy.com
    Fashion: Buying things you don't need, with money
    you don't have, to impress people you don't like...
  6. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    In article <WNKdnRBBG6Sc-HzfRVn-pQ@comcast.com>, bernie@notreally.com
    says...
    <snip>>
    > But the cheapest way to make 4x6 prints is to do your printing at
    > Walmart, CVS, etc. You can bring in your files in machine readable
    > form, or even better, e-mail them in and pick them up. If you e-mail
    > your files the prints will be waiting for you when you go to pick them
    > up and cost less than doing it yourself.
    >
    > Bernie
    >
    and a lot of people said similar things ....

    But, unless my math is really screwed up, it's costing me way less than
    10 cents per 4x6 print on my Canon i960 with refill ink & non OEM paper.

    Ink costs me 50 cents or less per refill, so thats $3 for all 6
    cartridges. Assuming 100 4x6 prints per refill, that's 3 cents per
    print. Good quality paper costs 8 cents for letter size, yielding 4x6 at
    under 3 cents, so it's 6 cents a print for consumables. (Fry's GC paper
    costs only 1.7 cents per 4x6, but results are not as good as OEM, but
    still OK for throwaway snapshots) Even if I'm WAY off on my estimate of
    number of prints, I'm still under 10 cents.
  7. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    I have an iP8500. It's great but I send most 6X4 snapshots to WalMart. 12
    cents each + mailing or 20 cents if I pick up. Can't really beat that price
    at home.

    --
    Remove -NOSPAM- to contact me.
  8. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Peter Balcombe wrote:

    >Having recently acquired a nice new high resolution digital camera I am
    >looking for a suitable photo printer to partner it. I am primarily
    >interested in producing good quality 6 by 4 inch photos, and am not
    >overconcerned about other printing aspects as I use an ancient but highly
    >economical HP laserjet 5p for correspondence and also have a HP 840c if I
    >want to go to colour for letterheads etc (I don't usually bother). I don't
    >envisage using my photoprinter away from home so portability is not an issue
    >nor will I usually go above 6x4 although the facility to do so occasionally
    >would be nice.
    >
    >I was thinking of a Canon PixMA IP4000
    >

    This is about the best value and best choice. Canon ink costs about
    $9.00 a cart at costco. Occassionally I have seen on sale and with
    rebate the IP4000 for as low as $80.00 and frequently for $100. Canon
    will release in August the IP4200, a 1 picoliter update to the IP4000
    but noticeably slower with fewer nozzles but with reformulated ink. I
    have not read any reviews on this printer. I have owned an IP4000 for
    10 months and have not seen any problems with it. I do use Canon OEM
    ink and I print on both Canon Photo Paper Pro and Costco/Kirkland Photo
    Glossy (may be Ilford) and get great results all the way to 8.5x11.
    The Costco paper appears to be almost as good and the Canon paper and
    1/7 the cost.

    >for which I have seen good write ups
    >and because Canon cartridges look noticeably cheaper than Epson or HP but a
    >guy at PCWorld has said this is misleading because Canon uses a different
    >print process to Epson which wastes less ink and produces better results. He
    >also said that because Canon printers run hotter they wear quicker. I have a
    >prejudice against Epson because I used to have a 600 model which was forever
    >blocking (finally apparently irretrievably) unless used daily.
    >
    >Am I being sold a tale or not? When I buy it will probably be on Ebay in any
    >case.
    >
    >

    I would not recommend eBay. Costco has the best return policy. If you
    are not happy just return it. They do not ask you for justifications.
    Fry's have consistenly had the printer on and off sale frequently and
    many times with exclusive rebate.

    >Peter
    >
    >
    >
    >
  9. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Irwin Peckinloomer wrote:

    >In article <WNKdnRBBG6Sc-HzfRVn-pQ@comcast.com>, bernie@notreally.com
    >says...
    ><snip>>
    >
    >
    >>But the cheapest way to make 4x6 prints is to do your printing at
    >>Walmart, CVS, etc. You can bring in your files in machine readable
    >>form, or even better, e-mail them in and pick them up. If you e-mail
    >>your files the prints will be waiting for you when you go to pick them
    >>up and cost less than doing it yourself.
    >>
    >>Bernie
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >and a lot of people said similar things ....
    >
    >But, unless my math is really screwed up, it's costing me way less than
    >10 cents per 4x6 print on my Canon i960 with refill
    >
    PRINTHEAD CLOGGING

    >ink & non OEM paper.
    >
    >Ink costs me 50 cents or less per refill, so thats $3 for all 6
    >cartridges.
    >

    FOR NONAME UNBRANDED WHO KNOWS WHAT PRINT CLOGGING INK

    >Assuming 100 4x6 prints per refill, that's 3 cents per
    >print. Good quality paper costs 8 cents for letter size, yielding 4x6 at
    >under 3 cents, so it's 6 cents a print for consumables. (Fry's GC paper
    >costs only 1.7 cents per 4x6, but results are not as good as OEM, but
    >still OK for throwaway snapshots) Even if I'm WAY off on my estimate of
    >number of prints, I'm still under 10 cents.
    >
    >

    THERE ARE TWO TYPES THAT CONTINUALLY PROFESS REFILLING CARTS. THE KIDS
    WHO DO NOT HAVE A POT TO PISS IN AND THE OLD FARTS WHO HAVE A POT BUT
    CANNOT PISS.
  10. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    In article <JvmEe.20527$NU2.16064@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>,
    inkystinky@oem.com says...
    >
    >
    > Irwin Peckinloomer wrote:
    >
    > >In article <WNKdnRBBG6Sc-HzfRVn-pQ@comcast.com>, bernie@notreally.com
    > >says...
    > ><snip>>
    > >
    > >
    > >>But the cheapest way to make 4x6 prints is to do your printing at
    > >>Walmart, CVS, etc. You can bring in your files in machine readable
    > >>form, or even better, e-mail them in and pick them up. If you e-mail
    > >>your files the prints will be waiting for you when you go to pick them
    > >>up and cost less than doing it yourself.
    > >>
    > >>Bernie
    > >>
    > >>
    > >>
    > >and a lot of people said similar things ....
    > >
    > >But, unless my math is really screwed up, it's costing me way less than
    > >10 cents per 4x6 print on my Canon i960 with refill
    > >
    > PRINTHEAD CLOGGING
    >
    > >ink & non OEM paper.
    > >
    > >Ink costs me 50 cents or less per refill, so thats $3 for all 6
    > >cartridges.
    > >
    >
    > FOR NONAME UNBRANDED WHO KNOWS WHAT PRINT CLOGGING INK
    >
    Measly doesn't realize (since he has no experience with bulk ink) that
    my refill ink from alotofthings.com is branded (sentient) has a lot #
    (which his OEM cartridges do not), and doesn't clog. He is right about
    some aftermarket cartridges, but wrong about refill ink. Since the major
    savings come from refilling, I see no sense in buying aftermarket
    cartridges either.>

    > THERE ARE TWO TYPES THAT CONTINUALLY PROFESS REFILLING CARTS. THE KIDS
    > WHO DO NOT HAVE A POT TO PISS IN AND THE OLD FARTS WHO HAVE A POT BUT
    > CANNOT PISS.

    I can't comment on this, since I don't have the detailed demographic
    info that Measly must have to make that statement. I refill because I
    don't like to waste money. Measly has stated that he doesn't need to
    save money, IMHOP this makes him the biggest kind of fool I can imagine.
  11. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Irwin Peckinloomer wrote:

    >In article <JvmEe.20527$NU2.16064@newssvr13.news.prodigy.com>,
    >inkystinky@oem.com says...
    >
    >
    >>Irwin Peckinloomer wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>In article <WNKdnRBBG6Sc-HzfRVn-pQ@comcast.com>, bernie@notreally.com
    >>>says...
    >>><snip>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>But the cheapest way to make 4x6 prints is to do your printing at
    >>>>Walmart, CVS, etc. You can bring in your files in machine readable
    >>>>form, or even better, e-mail them in and pick them up. If you e-mail
    >>>>your files the prints will be waiting for you when you go to pick them
    >>>>up and cost less than doing it yourself.
    >>>>
    >>>>Bernie
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>and a lot of people said similar things ....
    >>>
    >>>But, unless my math is really screwed up, it's costing me way less than
    >>>10 cents per 4x6 print on my Canon i960 with refill
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>PRINTHEAD CLOGGING
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>ink & non OEM paper.
    >>>
    >>>Ink costs me 50 cents or less per refill, so thats $3 for all 6
    >>>cartridges.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>FOR NONAME UNBRANDED WHO KNOWS WHAT PRINT CLOGGING INK
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >Measly doesn't realize (since he has no experience with bulk ink) that
    >my refill ink from .com is branded (sentient) has a lot #
    >(which his OEM cartridges do not), and doesn't clog. He is right about
    >some aftermarket cartridges
    >
    >
    >
    >>THERE ARE TWO TYPES THAT CONTINUALLY PROFESS REFILLING CARTS. THE KIDS
    >>WHO DO NOT HAVE A POT TO PISS IN AND THE OLD FARTS WHO HAVE A POT BUT
    >>CANNOT PISS.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >I can't comment on this, since I don't have the detailed demographic
    >info that Measly must have to make that statement. I refill because I
    >don't like to waste money. Measly has stated that he doesn't need to
    >save money, IMHOP this makes him the biggest kind of fool I can imagine.
    >
    >
  12. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    >This is about the best value and best choice. Canon ink costs about
    >$9.00 a cart at costco. Occassionally I have seen on sale and with
    >rebate the IP4000 for as low as $80.00 and frequently for $100. Canon
    >will release in August the IP4200, a 1 picoliter update to the IP4000
    >but noticeably slower with fewer nozzles but with reformulated ink.
    >have not read any reviews on this printer. I have owned an IP4000 for
    >10 months and have not seen any problems with it. I do use Canon OEM
    >ink and I print on both Canon Photo Paper Pro and Costco/Kirkland Photo
    >Glossy (may be Ilford) and get great results all the way to 8.5x11.
    >The Costco paper appears to be almost as good and the Canon paper and
    >1/7 the cost.

    Unless i'm mistaken, the person is in the UK. NTL address that sort of
    thing.

    Rule of thumb: "u after o except in America". Not a dead give away
    but should give you cause to look at the orgin of the post to see if
    they share a hemisphere with you.

    While they do have costcos there... their prices for canon printers are
    higher... I suspect due to the CD printing license fee and also they
    get those nifty auto switching 100v-240v 50/60hz power supplies in
    their printers. But i'm pretty sure the ip4200 isn't going to be sold
    in the UK, not yet anyway. Keep in mind also that the cost of the new
    ink for the ip4200 is going to be higher due in part to chips being
    added, near as i'm aware bci-6 ink isn't an option. The last time I
    looked they were as spendy as the Epson Ultra-chrome Pigmented inks.

    But talking letter size and US prices is not helpful.
  13. Archived from groups: comp.periphs.printers (More info?)

    Forget about 6x4 prints. They are definietly too small, and have wrong
    aspect ratio for digital camera (3:2 instead of 4:3). For the price of an
    inkjet 6"x4" print using OEM supplies I get a 15x20 photolab print at 340
    dpi on Kodak Royal material. This size definietly looks better, especially
    for landscape photography, than those small prints. 6"x4" is just enough for
    single object or a few objects, like one or few faces, a dog, or a child
    photograph.

    Besides, there are no longevity problems for lab photos. In inkjet world
    Canons print quickly fading photos, HP photos on swellable polymer paper are
    not waterproof, so a single drop of water can destroy your expansive print.
    Epson photos made with pigment colorant ink last longer than these from
    photolab, but the printer heads have a tendency to clog.

    If you want using inkjet anyway I advice you to buy A4/Letter photo paper in
    large packs and print 1 or 2 photos on each (or 4 13.3 x 10cm photos on
    single A4 page). Buying larger paper and cutting it is cheaper than using
    precut paper.

    Also buying an inkjet printers check for driver availability. Canon provides
    neither Windows 64 bit drivers, nor linux drivers, so you may end with
    unusable printer after computer uprgade or OS change. Epson has both Windows
    64 bit drivers and linux drivers for some models, hp has good linux drivers,
    and plans (but doesn't deliver yet) to release Windows 64 bit drivers.

    BTW. I was surprised to learn how cheap silver-halide paper is. They sell it
    in rolls like 80m x 20cm for $25. Inkjet paper price is a rip-off.
Ask a new question

Read More

Printers Photo Hewlett Packard Peripherals