Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Costing a Photo Printer

Last response: in Digital Camera
Share
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 8:37:45 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Hey guys,

This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
better idea...anyway...

Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.

I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
body is.

Thanks in advance,
Nicholas

P.S. I'd only be printing 4X6's from home, enlargements would be
printed from the lab.

More about : costing photo printer

Anonymous
June 21, 2005 8:37:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Nicholas Wittebol" <nicholas.wittebol@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:o P-dnSqqFcYQ5yXfRVn-uA@rogers.com...
> Hey guys,
>
> This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
> better idea...anyway...
>
> Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
> can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
> trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
> at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.
>
> I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
> ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
> will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
> body is.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Nicholas
>
> P.S. I'd only be printing 4X6's from home, enlargements would be
> printed from the lab.

If you're only printing 4x6s you can get the cost down where it's not too
much more than the online labs. But I basically found that the ability to
print my own 4x6s is priceless.

Greg
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 8:37:46 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Nicholas Wittebol wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
> better idea...anyway...
>
> Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
> can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
> trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
> at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.
>
> I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
> ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
> will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
> body is.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Nicholas
>
> P.S. I'd only be printing 4X6's from home, enlargements would be
> printed from the lab.

I am finding the opposite of some of the others here, I can print 4 x
6 prints at Costco for $0.19 (126 sqr inches / $1) or 8 x 12 inch
prints for $1.99 (48 sqr inches / $1). On a square inch basis the
larger prints cost over 2.5 times as much. I can't make a 4 x 6 inch
print on my printer for $0.19 but I can make a 8.5 x 11 inch print for
much less then $2.00.

If I am giving the print to someone else I have it printed at Costco
regardless of the size since I want it to last and not fade.

Scott
Related resources
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 8:37:47 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> writes:
> If you're only printing 4x6s you can get the cost down where it's not too
> much more than the online labs. But I basically found that the ability to
> print my own 4x6s is priceless.

GT, can you elaborate on why you feel that way?

I ask cus I've held off on a photo printer under the guise of "hard to
beat the lab's economy of scale and supplies are very expensive" but
am trying to coax myself off the mark on this.

Best Regards,
--
Todd H.
http://www.toddh.net/
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 8:37:48 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Todd H." <t@toddh.net> wrote in message news:84br5zo3cd.fsf@ripco.com...
> "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> writes:
> > If you're only printing 4x6s you can get the cost down where it's not
too
> > much more than the online labs. But I basically found that the ability
to
> > print my own 4x6s is priceless.
>
> GT, can you elaborate on why you feel that way?
>
> I ask cus I've held off on a photo printer under the guise of "hard to
> beat the lab's economy of scale and supplies are very expensive" but
> am trying to coax myself off the mark on this.
>

It's really a personal thing. It definitely takes a lot more patience than
dropping off a CD at a lab or uploading files online. But if I want to
start throwing together a photo album the night I get home from a trip I can
do so. It will probably never be cost-effective, though.

Greg
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 9:20:52 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Nicholas Wittebol wrote:

> Hey guys,
>
> This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
> better idea...anyway...
>
> Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
> can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
> trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
> at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.
>
> I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
> ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
> will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
> body is.

A 4x6 is not so bad. But, frame to frame, still a lot cheaper by
internet to a local store and $0.30 (or whatever your local price is).

Actual counts vary widely from printer to printer. My costs for a 4x6
runs CAD$1.00 to $2.00. (paper / ink). But this includes a rejection
rate of about 1/4 to 1/2 of images for colour that is uncceptable.

My costs are higher still, as I usually print 1 to 3 4x6's before I
print an 8.5 x 11 ...

In the end, it is easier and cheaper (for me) to send them to a local
place via their web interface and have them print it. I've done this
for 4x6, 5x7, 8x10, 8x12, 10x15 and 24x36.

Cheers,
Alan
--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 9:20:53 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
news:D 9a0bl$b64$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
> Nicholas Wittebol wrote:
>
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
> > better idea...anyway...
> >
> > Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
> > can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
> > trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
> > at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to
go.
> >
> > I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
> > ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
> > will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
> > body is.
>
> A 4x6 is not so bad. But, frame to frame, still a lot cheaper by
> internet to a local store and $0.30 (or whatever your local price is).
>
> Actual counts vary widely from printer to printer. My costs for a 4x6
> runs CAD$1.00 to $2.00. (paper / ink). But this includes a rejection
> rate of about 1/4 to 1/2 of images for colour that is uncceptable.
>

That sounds kind of high. I don't reject many 4x6s because they're just
vacation snapshots 99% of the time. Anything nice I'll print larger.

Epson 4x6 borderless: 16 cents a sheet
7 ink cartridges: $75, printed 175 4x6s so far and still have 1/3 in each
tank according to status app. 175/(2/3)=262, $75/262=.29
29 cents a print
16+29=45 cents a print
Ability to print my own at any time: priceless

Is my math right?

Greg
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 9:49:49 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I'll agree: There are occasions when I really, really want to print
out a 4x6 at home. For that purpose, I got a 4x6 dye-sub printer, they
blow away what any inkjet will do - but at a price. (60 cents or more
per print.) For the few times it gets used, I don't mind blowing the
equivalent of a can of soda.

However, that is just for the few that I really can't wait for - most
all of my prints do get sent off for printing, either for economy or
size. Trying to print an 8x10 at home that rivals the quality of a
good professional printer gets to be a very expensive endeavor!

steve
Anonymous
June 21, 2005 11:52:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I use Canon photo printers with compatible ink cartridges. This makes
the cost of ink almost negligable as I spend less than $2/each for BCI-6
carts. The color isn't quite as good as OEM carts but it's within
90%-95% which is close enough for my use. I buy Ilford Photo Pearl 4x6
paper on ebay for about $0.18 per sheet. Ink cost is about 4-5 cents
per print. This makes the total cost for a 4"x6" print about 23 cents.

The real cost savings is for the larger prints like 8.5"x11". I can get
Ilford paper in this size for about 22 cents per sheet and ink cost is
about 12-15 cents per sheet. This results in an 8.5"x11" print cost of
less than 40 cents each. No photo lab can touch that cost.

Nicholas Wittebol wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
> better idea...anyway...
>
> Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
> can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
> trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
> at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.
>
> I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
> ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
> will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
> body is.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Nicholas
>
> P.S. I'd only be printing 4X6's from home, enlargements would be
> printed from the lab.
June 22, 2005 2:02:09 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Scott W wrote:
> Nicholas Wittebol wrote:
>
>>Hey guys,
>>
>>This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
>>better idea...anyway...
>>
>>Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
>>can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
>>trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
>>at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.
>>
>>I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
>>ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
>>will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
>>body is.
>>
>>Thanks in advance,
>>Nicholas
>>
>>P.S. I'd only be printing 4X6's from home, enlargements would be
>>printed from the lab.
>
>
> I am finding the opposite of some of the others here, I can print 4 x
> 6 prints at Costco for $0.19 (126 sqr inches / $1) or 8 x 12 inch
> prints for $1.99 (48 sqr inches / $1). On a square inch basis the
> larger prints cost over 2.5 times as much. I can't make a 4 x 6 inch
> print on my printer for $0.19 but I can make a 8.5 x 11 inch print for
> much less then $2.00.
>
> If I am giving the print to someone else I have it printed at Costco
> regardless of the size since I want it to last and not fade.
>
> Scott


Same here. I print 4x6 at Costco, and especially 12x16 which is merely
$3 ea.

I do have an Epson R200. In fact, I had two and one died (head clog)
because I didn't use it much. I bought another one at OfficeDepot a few
weeks ago for $50 + tax, after rebate because I still have some
supplies. The new printer with ink is cheaper than just a set of ink,
which is $58 (6-ink set) at Costco. Despite the fact that it's obscene
knowing we're being gouged by the printer companies (but they gave us
the printer practically free), it's convenient to print one or two
occasionally to give out to friends. I am knowing _forcing_ myself to
print a few pix at home each week to keep the print head healthy.
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 2:30:59 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Tue, 21 Jun 2005 17:20:52 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote:

>Nicholas Wittebol wrote:
>
>> Hey guys,
>>
>> This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
>> better idea...anyway...
>>
>> Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
>> can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
>> trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
>> at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.
>>
>> I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
>> ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
>> will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
>> body is.
>
>A 4x6 is not so bad. But, frame to frame, still a lot cheaper by
>internet to a local store and $0.30 (or whatever your local price is).
>
>Actual counts vary widely from printer to printer. My costs for a 4x6
>runs CAD$1.00 to $2.00. (paper / ink). But this includes a rejection
>rate of about 1/4 to 1/2 of images for colour that is uncceptable.
>
>My costs are higher still, as I usually print 1 to 3 4x6's before I
>print an 8.5 x 11 ...
>
>In the end, it is easier and cheaper (for me) to send them to a local
>place via their web interface and have them print it. I've done this
>for 4x6, 5x7, 8x10, 8x12, 10x15 and 24x36.
>
>Cheers,
>Alan

Just more proof the inkjet printer market is a horrific rip off.
They con people into buying in with unrealistically cheap printers
then rape you with the ink costs. Just imagine, a layer of ink,
maybe a couple thousanths of an inch thick ends up costing $0.50
or whatever. Or like I've said before, about 10x the price of silver
by weight. The biggest con was how they pretended at some point to
divulge ink costs, by providing figures for coverage on a page
amounting to about 4-5%, or the amount of coverage a page of typeface
has. Not often you see it that sparse on a print of a photo.
There are books that tell you exact costs for each printer out there,
I think they cost about $50.00.
June 22, 2005 7:27:00 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

NG wrote:

>
> For that purpose, I got a 4x6 dye-sub printer, they
> blow away what any inkjet will do

Sorry, that's just not the case anymore.

--

Stacey
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 11:01:19 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I have an Epson 870, buy color ink mail order for $15, b/w $20,

8X10 run $1
4x6 run $0.37


Nicholas Wittebol wrote:
> Hey guys,
>
> This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
> better idea...anyway...
>
> Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
> can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
> trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
> at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.
>
> I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
> ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
> will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
> body is.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Nicholas
>
> P.S. I'd only be printing 4X6's from home, enlargements would be
> printed from the lab.
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 12:05:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:

> "Alan Browne" <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote in message
> news:D 9a0bl$b64$1@inews.gazeta.pl...
>
>>Nicholas Wittebol wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Hey guys,
>>>
>>>This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
>>>better idea...anyway...
>>>
>>>Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
>>>can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
>>>trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print
>>>at home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to
>
> go.
>
>>>I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the
>>>ink and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it
>>>will likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR
>>>body is.
>>
>>A 4x6 is not so bad. But, frame to frame, still a lot cheaper by
>>internet to a local store and $0.30 (or whatever your local price is).
>>
>>Actual counts vary widely from printer to printer. My costs for a 4x6
>>runs CAD$1.00 to $2.00. (paper / ink). But this includes a rejection
>>rate of about 1/4 to 1/2 of images for colour that is uncceptable.
>>
>
>
> That sounds kind of high. I don't reject many 4x6s because they're just
> vacation snapshots 99% of the time. Anything nice I'll print larger.
>
> Epson 4x6 borderless: 16 cents a sheet
> 7 ink cartridges: $75, printed 175 4x6s so far and still have 1/3 in each
> tank according to status app. 175/(2/3)=262, $75/262=.29
> 29 cents a print
> 16+29=45 cents a print
> Ability to print my own at any time: priceless
>
> Is my math right?

Up until the priceless part. You're getting better stock prices than we
get here. But if you take your 45 cents and then reject 1/3 of them,
then the price goes to 60. Then convert to CDN you're at 80 cts. so
your costs are 20 - 70% cheaper than mine. I get 4x6 at $0.49 (CAD) and
all indicatations are that this price is about to fall. I just pick
them up when I pick up other prints.

Cheers,
Alan.


--
-- r.p.e.35mm user resource: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpe35mmur.htm
-- r.p.d.slr-systems: http://www.aliasimages.com/rpdslrsysur.htm
-- [SI] gallery & rulz: http://www.pbase.com/shootin
-- e-meil: Remove FreeLunch.
June 22, 2005 1:55:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Nicholas Wittebol wrote:
<snip>
> P.S. I'd only be printing 4X6's from home, enlargements would be
> printed from the lab.
<snip>
That is a strange plan.
Approximate costs for prints from a *good* lab in my area are
(prices are converted to US$):

12 x 18" $17.00
8 x 10" $7.00
A discount for large volumes is available.

My costs at home are:
12 x 18" < $6.00
8 x 10" < $2.00

That is for printing on premium/pro quality papers. I think that I have
done enough prints now to get a pretty reasonable estimate of cost.
Quality is better, I can print on a wider range of media (including
matte and fine art papers), and I have control of every part of the process.

On the other hand, the discount photo labs in my area are probably
cheaper and far less hassle for 6x4s.
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 6:40:59 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

I do not believe that there is any ink jet printer than can do better than a
dye sub printer. Has any one compared prints made with the latest and best
ink jet to a dye sub print?

Just my personal opinion.
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 8:12:15 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 08:05:16 -0400, Alan Browne
<alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
> But if you take your 45 cents and then reject 1/3 of them,
> then the price goes to 60.

67.5 cents. Three prints for $1.35; throw away one, and divide
the cost between the remaining two.

--
Ben Rosengart (212) 741-4400 x215
Sometimes it only makes sense to focus our attention on those
questions that are equal parts trivial and intriguing.
--Josh Micah Marshall
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 8:12:16 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Ben Rosengart wrote:
> On Wed, 22 Jun 2005 08:05:16 -0400, Alan Browne
> <alan.browne@FreeLunchVideotron.ca> wrote:
>
>>But if you take your 45 cents and then reject 1/3 of them,
>>then the price goes to 60.
>
>
> 67.5 cents. Three prints for $1.35; throw away one, and divide
> the cost between the remaining two.

Oy. I just flipped the numbers out w/o calculating. The idea remains
the same. ... and printing at home does not really save much money...

Cheers,
Alan.



--
A beaver and a rabbit are sitting in the woods near Hoover Dam.
"Did you build that one?" the rabbit asked.
"No, but it was based on an idea of mine," the beaver replied.
-Jack Kilby on his invention of the IC.
Anonymous
June 22, 2005 8:29:27 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

It ain't about cost. It's about quality.
If you don't think you can efficiently make prints of higher quality than a
commercial finisher, and if quality does not matter to you, then it is far
cheaper to let Costco/Walmart/Shutterfly etc botch your prints for you
instead of botching them yourself.
June 22, 2005 8:34:54 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

NG wrote:
> I'll agree: There are occasions when I really, really want to print
> out a 4x6 at home. For that purpose, I got a 4x6 dye-sub printer, they
> blow away what any inkjet will do - but at a price. (60 cents or more
> per print.) For the few times it gets used, I don't mind blowing the
> equivalent of a can of soda.
>
> However, that is just for the few that I really can't wait for - most
> all of my prints do get sent off for printing, either for economy or
> size. Trying to print an 8x10 at home that rivals the quality of a
> good professional printer gets to be a very expensive endeavor!
>
> steve
>
Are you sure that a dye sub will blow away the results from a higher end
consumer inkjet made in the past year or so? None of the small
consumer models that I have seen come even close. In particular, they
fail on sharpness, colour gamut and accuracy, cost, limited media sizes,
limited media types, and of course they are useless for document
printing. Their good points are that they are small and the prints are
reasonably durable and able to be immediately handled compared with a
fresh inkjet print.

Trying to print an excellent quality 8x10 at home is actually not very
hard. I don't have any problem printing up to 19" x 13" - and they look
better than Cibachromes printed from 50 iso fuji slide film.
Anonymous
June 23, 2005 7:53:57 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

"Nicholas Wittebol" <nicholas.wittebol@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:o P-dnSqqFcYQ5yXfRVn-uA@rogers.com...
> Hey guys,
>
> This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
> better idea...anyway...
>
> Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
> can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
> trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print at
> home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.
>
> I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the ink
> and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it will
> likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR body
> is.
>
> Thanks in advance,
> Nicholas
>
> P.S. I'd only be printing 4X6's from home, enlargements would be printed
> from the lab.

Alan Browne must be using an Epson Printer without a colour balanced system.
I use Dye-sub printers exclusively for small prints and the cost is fixed at
53¢ AUD per print plus the redundance of the printers. You can buy an Epson
"Personal Photo Lab" it's called a 'Picturemate' pretty cheaply and it too
has fixed price consumables with cost at about 35¢ per print. Oc course the
USA prices will be even cheaper. KMart here in Australia charge 23¢ per
print with no control over their "Auto" settings. I've seen some shockers
come off their machines.

Douglas
Anonymous
June 23, 2005 7:53:58 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Once was Ryadia wrote:

> "Nicholas Wittebol" <nicholas.wittebol@rogers.com> wrote in message
> news:o P-dnSqqFcYQ5yXfRVn-uA@rogers.com...
>
>>Hey guys,
>>
>>This is not a DSLR specific, but I thought that DSLR owners would have a
>>better idea...anyway...
>>
>>Does anyone have a number for the average amount of 4X6 prints that you
>>can get out of a printer before you have to buy new ink cartridges? I'm
>>trying to figure out if it is worth the convenience to be able to print at
>>home, or if the cost is too much, and lab processing is the way to go.
>>
>>I guess I'm trying to figure out cost per print after you include the ink
>>and paper. I'm not too worried about the cost of the printer, as it will
>>likely be a one time purchase, and only updated as often as my DSLR body
>>is.
>>
>>Thanks in advance,
>>Nicholas
>>
>>P.S. I'd only be printing 4X6's from home, enlargements would be printed
>>from the lab.
>
>
> Alan Browne must be using an Epson Printer without a colour balanced system.
> I use Dye-sub printers exclusively for small prints and the cost is fixed at
> 53¢ AUD per print plus the redundance of the printers. You can buy an Epson

I don't have much use for 4x6's, so a Dye Sub is out. Yes I have a
wretched Epson (was essentially free) which is mostly for printing
documents. I prefer using the lab printer for a variety of reasons. I
have had a couple minor colour goofs there, my fault, but otherwise no
issues.

Cheers,
Alan


--
A beaver and a rabbit are sitting in the woods near Hoover Dam.
"Did you build that one?" the rabbit asked.
"No, but it was based on an idea of mine," the beaver replied.
-Jack Kilby on his invention of the IC.
June 23, 2005 12:45:14 PM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Arthur Small wrote:
> I do not believe that there is any ink jet printer than can do better than a
> dye sub printer. Has any one compared prints made with the latest and best
> ink jet to a dye sub print?
>
> Just my personal opinion.
>
>
Yes, and the dye sub prints do not compare. The dye sub prints strike
me as being nearly as good as what a photo lab produces. Even small
prints from an inexpensive new inkjet (such as a pixma ip4000) look
better than typical lab prints.
Anonymous
June 24, 2005 9:51:27 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

G.T. wrote:
> "Todd H." <t@toddh.net> wrote in message news:84br5zo3cd.fsf@ripco.com...
> > "G.T." <getnews1@dslextreme.com> writes:
> > > If you're only printing 4x6s you can get the cost down where it's not
> too
> > > much more than the online labs. But I basically found that the ability
> to
> > > print my own 4x6s is priceless.
> >
> > GT, can you elaborate on why you feel that way?
> >
> > I ask cus I've held off on a photo printer under the guise of "hard to
> > beat the lab's economy of scale and supplies are very expensive" but
> > am trying to coax myself off the mark on this.
> >
>
> It's really a personal thing. It definitely takes a lot more patience than
> dropping off a CD at a lab or uploading files online. But if I want to
> start throwing together a photo album the night I get home from a trip I can
> do so. It will probably never be cost-effective, though.
>
> Greg

It is not about being cost effective. If you have printer at home -
you control the output. You can get tools to calibrate the printers
with monitor.
You also are able to print on your schedule, not the lab's schedule.

So you get home from a shoot, and process your own prints. No waiting
for the lab. You control the final product. You don't have to worry
if the lab has fresh chemicals, if the lab has their printers
calibrated, if the lab technician knows how to print digital photos, or
for film prints if the lab has a channel for your film. These are the
reasons you want your own printer.
It might cost more, but you should be printing at home.

roland
Anonymous
June 29, 2005 5:47:25 AM

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital.slr-systems (More info?)

Hi all, I recently ditched my "Oh so excellent"...Not! Epson 895 and moved
over to an HP 8450 Photosmart jobbie! Well,,, the 6x4 wedding proofs that it
spat out at the rate of one every 35 seconds blew away my fears of weather
an inkjet could match a lab result. Yes, it works out to approx 6o uk pence
a slice but the sharpness, colour, contrast etc were better than any lab
would have acheived. To cement that fact, I have been asked to produce
another 4 Proof albums as saleable items from which I can recover all costs
and a little profit....smile!!!

"frederick" <nomail@nomail.com> wrote in message
news:1119473047.962336@ftpsrv1...
> Arthur Small wrote:
>> I do not believe that there is any ink jet printer than can do better
>> than a dye sub printer. Has any one compared prints made with the latest
>> and best ink jet to a dye sub print?
>>
>> Just my personal opinion.
>>
>>
> Yes, and the dye sub prints do not compare. The dye sub prints strike me
> as being nearly as good as what a photo lab produces. Even small prints
> from an inexpensive new inkjet (such as a pixma ip4000) look better than
> typical lab prints.
!